Roup v. Sup.
Filed 3/22/06 Roup v. Sup. Ct. CA2/1
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION ONE
| HERMAN S. ROUP et al., Petitioners, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY, Respondent; TAG-IT PACIFIC, INC., Real Party in Interest. | B188652 (L.A.S.C. No. BC328972) OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PEREMPTORY WRIT OF MANDATE |
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING; petition for writ of mandate. Joanne O'Donnell, Judge. Petition granted.
Wolf, Rifkin, Shapiro & Schulman, Simon Aron and Stephen M. Levine for Petitioners.
No appearance for Respondent.
Zimmerman, Rosenfeld, Gersh & Leeds, Jeffrey F. Gersh and Rochelle A. Herzog for Real Party in Interest.
___________________________
We hold that because the demanding party did not designate its trade secrets before deposing the opposing party concerning those trade secrets, no sanctions should have been imposed for the opposing party's refusal to answer questions about the trade secrets. The subsequent imposition of additional sanctions, based at least in part on the first, erroneous order, was also erroneous. Accordingly, we order respondent court to vacate both sanction orders.[1]
BACKGROUND
Tag-It Pacific, Inc., sued Herman S. Roup and his companies, Bendigo Consultants LLC and Bendigo International, Inc. (collectively â€
