Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Bowker v. "Tatu", 18-CV-1986-WQH(WVG). (2019)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20190905853
Filed: Sep. 04, 2019
Latest Update: Sep. 04, 2019
Summary: ORDER FOLLOWING SHOW CAUSE HEARING WILLIAM V. GALLO , Magistrate Judge . The Court has reviewed the transcript of the May 29, 2019 OSC hearing, Defendant Golovina's two declarations and attached exhibits, her attorney's declaration, Plaintiff's memorandum in support of sanctions, Fransea's position on sanctions, and Defendant's memorandum in opposition to sanctions. (Doc. Nos. 67, 68, 69, 75, 81, 82, 83.) The Court has concluded that no sanctions will be imposed at this time. The Court has
More

ORDER FOLLOWING SHOW CAUSE HEARING

The Court has reviewed the transcript of the May 29, 2019 OSC hearing, Defendant Golovina's two declarations and attached exhibits, her attorney's declaration, Plaintiff's memorandum in support of sanctions, Fransea's position on sanctions, and Defendant's memorandum in opposition to sanctions. (Doc. Nos. 67, 68, 69, 75, 81, 82, 83.) The Court has concluded that no sanctions will be imposed at this time.

The Court has determined that Golovina—despite repeated orders from the Court to be present at the April 1, 2019 ENE—did not act in bad faith by failing to attend. Nor was Plaintiff prejudiced in any discernible way due to Golovina's absence. The Court is convinced that Golovina made arrangements to travel to London, England before February 22, 2019—the date that the ENE was scheduled—to attend a very important business meeting. Although the Court believes Golovina could have done more to reschedule the London meeting so she could be present at the ENE, the Court cannot conclude that her absence was motivated by bad faith or intent to impede the settlement process. The fact that Plaintiffs-in-intervention were able to resolve the case with Golovina despite her absence is evidence that her absence was not completely detrimental. Moreover, Golovina was essentially "between a rock and a hard place." Either she attended the London business meeting and missed the ENE, potentially subjecting herself to sanctions, or she attended the ENE and missed the London meeting, potentially doing irreparable harm to her business interests. While the Court wishes Golovina chose to attend the ENE, the Court forgives—but does not condone—her decision.

Golovina is hereby on notice that she is expected to be personally present at future proceedings when the Court so orders and that she will make necessary arrangements to do so.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer