Skip to main content.

Fraud Alert: Scam Text Messages Claiming DMV Penalties -

We have been made aware of fraudulent text messages being sent to individuals claiming to be from the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) or the court system. These messages often state that the recipient owes penalties or fees related to traffic violations or DMV infractions and may include a link or phone number to resolve the matter. 

Take these steps to reduce the chances of falling victim to a text message scam:

  • Never respond to unsolicited or suspicious texts — If you receive a message asking for personal or financial information, do not reply.
  • Verify the source — If you are unsure, always contact the DMV through official channels.
  • Call the DMV if you have concerns — The DMV customer service team is available to help you at 800-777-0133.

Please see DMV warning about fraudulent texts: https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/news-and-media/dmv-warns-of-fraudulent-te…

Jury Scam alert -

The Santa Barbara Superior Court has received complaints about individuals trying to scam members of the public by pretending to be court officers or officials. The Jury Services office of the Santa Barbara Superior Court does not call citizens to request payments for failing to appear for jury duty. California law does not permit citizens to pay a fine in lieu of jury duty. If you receive such a call simply hang up and, if the scammer persists, call your local law enforcement agency. Learn more about the recent scam warning.

Notice to Jurors:

Prospective jurors summoned for jury service can expect to receive their jury summons in postcard form. Please check your mail for a postcard with important instructions to fulfil your jury service. Visit the Jury Services page for more information.

Ralph Gesualdo vs Frinj Coffee Inc

Case Number

23CV03712

Case Type

Civil Law & Motion

Hearing Date / Time

Wed, 12/06/2023 - 10:00

Nature of Proceedings

3 Motions to Compel by Plaintiff; request for sanctions.

Tentative Ruling

Andrew Shadoff for Plaintiff

Nina Yablok for Defendant

Issue

3 Motions to Compel by Plaintiff; request for sanctions.

Ruling

The motion be denied if verified responses to the requests are provided to the propounding party prior to the hearing on the motion and granted if verified responses to the requests are not provided to the propounding party prior to the hearing on the motion. Sanctions are mandatory for a deemed admissions motion. Sanctions are awarded in the amount of $6,000 and to be paid by the Defendant and/or Defendant’s counsel by 1/1/24.

Analysis

There are 2 motions to compel any discovery responses, and one motion for deemed admissions, set for hearing; Defendant opposed the motions on several grounds, which are fully set forth in their papers:

(1) Contends Plaintiff’s counsel had not met and conferred. But there is no meet and confer requirement when no responses have been provided.

(2) Believes not responding was justified because it would be better served spending time trying to raise money to pay back Plaintiff, rather than responding to discovery; contends it made that determination in good faith (and intends to provide responses if ordered to do so). But, however reasonable that position may or may not be, it is not a justification to refuse to respond to discovery, unless the propounding party agrees to defer responses.

(3) That no sanctions should be imposed, since defense counsel offered to have her client sign a stipulation for entry of judgment to be enforced on a later date and that would have avoided the hearings. Plaintiff responds that floating an idea regarding a way to resolve a lawsuit, and refusing to respond to discovery, is not in good faith. Further, defense counsel didn’t provide any draft of a proposed stipulation until November 20, 2023, three weeks after responses were due, and two weeks after the motions were filed; it is under review, but Plaintiff’s counsel has not agreed to enter into the stipulation.

An order compelling responses to the two motions to compel is warranted. It is within the Court’s discretion whether to award sanctions (Plaintiff seeks $4,470 for the motion to compel responses to demand for production, $3,735 for the motion to compel responses to form interrogatories, and $4,470 for the deemed admissions motion).

With respect to the deemed admissions motion, it is standard for the Court to order that the motion be denied if verified responses to the requests are provided to the propounding party prior to the hearing on the motion and granted if verified responses to the requests are not provided to the propounding party prior to the hearing on the motion. Sanctions are mandatory for a deemed admissions motion.

Was this helpful?

Yes No
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Was this helpful?