In a personal injury action, the trial court granted defendant’s Motion in Limine and excluded three of plaintiff’s proposed witnesses as an evidence sanction for failure to respond completely to an interrogatory. Defendant had sent form interrogatory 12.1 asking about witnesses who witnessed “the incident,” and plaintiff responded with the name and address of one witness. Thereafter, plaintiff identified several witnesses she intended to call at trial, none of which witnessed the accident, but each would testify about plaintiff’s physical limitations. The Court of Appeal issued a peremptory writ of mandate directing the trial court to vacate its order.], (Mitchell v. Sup. Ct. (Ernestine Lisa Johnson) (Cal. App. Second Dist., Div. 4; December 4, 2015) (Ord. Pub. December 22, 2015) 243 Cal.App.4th 269 [196 Cal.Rptr.3d 168].)Superior Court Abused Its Discretion In Sanction Order Over Discovery Issue.
In a personal injury action, the trial court granted defendant’s Motion in Limine and excluded three of plaintiff’s proposed witnesses as an evidence sanction for failure to respond completely to an interrogatory. Defendant had sent form interrogatory 12.1 asking about witnesses who witnessed “the incident,” and plaintiff responded with the name and address of one witness. Thereafter, plaintiff identified several witnesses she intended to call at trial, none of which witnessed the accident, but each would testify about plaintiff’s physical limitations. The Court of Appeal issued a peremptory writ of mandate directing the trial court to vacate its order.], (Mitchell v. Sup. Ct. (Ernestine Lisa Johnson) (Cal. App. Second Dist., Div. 4; December 4, 2015) (Ord. Pub. December 22, 2015) 243 Cal.App.4th 269 [196 Cal.Rptr.3d 168].)