Rodriguez v. Brill
Annotate this CaseBrill, an attorney, and Rodriguez lived together as husband and wife for years. When they separated, Rodriguez sued, asserting that Brill promised to support her for the rest of her life and, in exchange, she gave up opportunities to obtain education to support herself. The trial court dismissed, as a sanction for Rodriguez’s failure to respond to discovery. She claimed neglect by her attorney, providing a declaration of her counsel acknowledging negligence. The court denied Rodriguez’s motion for relief from judgment. On remand, the trial court filed an order prepared by defense counsel: “Motion is denied” and ordered judgment in favor of Brill, with no findings. The court of appeal reversed. A dismissal that implements a terminating sanction for discovery abuse is a “dismissal entered,” so that Rodriguez could apply for mandatory relief. The reporter’s transcript and the written order prepared by defense counsel did not contain the required finding that the client’s negligence or willful misconduct was a contributory cause of the terminating sanction. The court concluded that Rodriguez’s conduct was not a contributing cause, so that Rodriguez was eligible for mandatory relief, given that verified discovery responses were delivered to opposing counsel before the hearing and the content of those responses substantially complied with applicable requirements.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.