Reedy v. Bussell
Letantia and Todd Bussell appeal from the judgments entered against them on five probate petitions joined for trial. These judgments followed the imposition of terminating sanctions. Letantia and Todd argue, among other things, that the court abused its discretion in imposing such a draconian punishment. We disagree. Letantia and Todds entire course of conduct in this case can be fairly summed up in two words: Make me. Respondent Jacqueline Reedy had to do so repeatedly, filing motions with the court to force their compliance with discovery obligations, and at other times simply caving in to their unreasonable demands for accommodations. The court consistently gave Letantia and Todd the benefit of the doubt, and strongly indulged the policy preference for allowing matters to proceed on their merits.
The judgment against Todd is reversed with respect to Reedys petition case Nos. A217515 and A219334, and those petitions are remanded with directions that the court reconsider whether more limited issue sanctions, relating to liability only, would be appropriate, and for further proceedings in accordance with that decision. The judgment is affirmed in all other respects.
Comments on Reedy v. Bussell