(BK) Jerome v. Barnack ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CONNIE JEROME, et al., No. 2:19-cv-0073 MCE DB 12 Plaintiffs, 13 v. ORDER 14 ROBERT SCOTT BARNACK, an Individual 15 16 Defendant. 17 18 On October 19, 2020, the undersigned issued an Order for Appearance and Examination 19 of Judgment Debtor Robert Scott Barnack, as well as for the production of documents. (ECF No. 20 29.) That order has never been complied with. Instead, despite the undersigned’s repeated 21 cautions against such conduct, Robert Barnack and attorney Julia Young have repeatedly failed to 22 comply with that order through Barnack’s failures to appear and failures to produce documents. 23 Accordingly, on May 20, 2021, the undersigned issued an order again ordering Barnack to 24 produce responsive documents and to appear at a judgment debtor examination on June 18, 2021. 25 On June 15, 2021, the judgment creditor filed a document stating that Barnack has yet again 26 failed to comply with the undersigned’s order by failing to produce the documents as ordered. 27 (ECF No. 42.) Because the documents are necessary for an effective judgment debtor 28 examination, the filing requests a continuance of the June 18, 2021 examination. 1 Robert Barnack and attorney Young appear to have again disregarded the undersigned’s 2 words of caution and threats of monetary sanction. With respect to the limits of the court’s 3 authority to sanction, Barnack and Young are advised that their consistent contempt and 4 disobedience may subject them to “both” monetary sanctions and “imprisonment.” 18 U.S.C. § 5 401; see also U.S. v. State of Tenn., 925 F. Supp. 1292, 1301 (W.D. Tenn. 1995) (“Both 6 imprisonment and fines, when coercive or conditional, are legitimate civil contempt sanctions.”); 7 In re Joint Eastern and Southern Districts Asbestos Litigation, 830 F. Supp. 1153, 1155 (C.D. Ill. 8 1993) (“imprisonment or fines can be used as sanctions”). 9 Although the undersigned has reached no conclusions, Robert Barnack and attorney 10 Young should be prepared to pay considerable monetary sanctions. If they continue to show 11 contempt for the undersigned’s orders they should prepare to face imprisonment. 12 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 13 1. On or before July 2, 2021, Robert Barnack shall produce responsive documents; 14 2. The June 18, 2021 judgment debtor examination is continued to Friday, July 23, 2021, 15 at 9:30 a.m., at the United States District Court, 501 I Street, Sacramento, California, in 16 Courtroom No. 27; 17 3. On or before July 30, 2021, attorney Young and Robert Barnack shall show cause in 18 writing as to why they should not be sanctioned for repeatedly failing to comply with the orders 19 of this court; 20 4. On or before August 6, 2021, the judgment creditor shall file a brief addressing the 21 propriety and calculation of any requested sanctions; 22 5. On or before August 13, 2021, Robert Barnack and/or attorney Young may file a 23 response addressing the sanctions sought; and 24 6. Attorney Young and Robert Scott Barnack shall appear on Friday, August 20, 2021, 25 at 10:00 a.m., at the United States District Court, 501 I Street, Sacramento, California, in 26 Courtroom No. 27, before the undersigned to address their conduct and the appropriate sanctions. 27 //// 28 //// 1 DATED: June 15, 2021 /s/ DEBORAH BARNES UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 DLB:6 21 DB\orders\orders.civil\jerome0073.cont.osc2 22 23 24 25 26 27 28