JANE DOE VS. CHRISTIAN LARSEN ET AL

Set for Law and Motion/Discovery Calendar on Friday, December 19, 2025, Line 8.

2 - Defendant's unopposed Motion for Terminating Sanctions is granted. The court finds that Plaintiff willfully refused to comply with the court's prior orders dated December 11, 2024 and June 20, 2025 directing her to provide verified responses without objection to Defendant's first set of special interrogatories, first set of form interrogatories, and first set of requests for production of documents. Plaintiff also willfully refused to comply with the court's June 20, 2025 order directing her to provide responses without objection to Defendant's first set of requests for admissions, except for objections based on privilege. Plaintiff failed to pay previously ordered monetary sanctions of $6500.

Concurrently with this motion, the court heard and granted Defendant's motion to compel Plaintiff to attend a deposition after Plaintiff failed to attend her deposition and would not cooperate in re-scheduling her deposition. Plaintiff has provided no substantial justification for her long-standing refusal to comply with discovery requests. During the period that Plaintiff refused to engage in discovery, she filed several unmeritorious motions and appeals. On November 3, 2025, the court declared her a vexatious litigant.

The court finds that under the circumstances it would be futile to issue further orders compelling Plaintiff to participate in the discovery process. Terminating sanctions may be issued against a party who has engaged in abuse of the discovery process. (Code of Civil Procedure 2023.030(d)(4)) "Courts have the inherent authority to dismiss a case as a sanction. [Citation.] The authority should be exercised only in extreme situations, such as where the conduct was clear and deliberate and no lesser sanction would remedy the situation." This is such a case. Accordingly, as and for a terminating sanction for willful failure to engage in the discovery process, Plaintiff's answer to Ripple's x-cross-complaint shall be stricken, and her default shall be entered.

For the 9:00 a.m. calendar, all attorneys and parties may appear in Department 302 remotely or in person. Remote hearings will be conducted by videoconference using Zoom. (Dept. 302 Zoom ID 160 409 7690; Passcode 516287.) To appear remotely at the hearing, go to the court's website at sfsuperiorcourt.org under "Online Services," navigate to "Tentative Rulings," and click on the appropriate link, or dial the corresponding phone number.

Any party who contests a tentative ruling must send an email to contestdept302tr@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties by 4pm stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. The subject line of the email shall include the line number, case name and case number. The text of the email shall include the name and contact information, including email address, of the attorney or party who will appear at the hearing.

Counsel for the prevailing party is required to prepare a proposed order which repeats verbatim the substantive portion of the tentative ruling and must email it to contestdept302tr@sftc.org prior to the hearing even if the tentative ruling is not contested.

The court no longer provides a court reporter in the Law & Motion Department. Parties may retain their own reporter, who may appear in the courtroom or remotely. A retained reporter must be a California certified court reporter (CSR), for only a CSR's transcript may be used in California courts. If a CSR is being retained, include in your email all of the following: their name, CSR and telephone numbers, and their individual work email address.

=(302/CM) | |