Discovery Sanctions in California: What a Judge Can Do Under Code of Civil Procedure Section 2023.030

Last updated: November 2026. Reviewed by Pavel Kolmogorov, California business litigation attorney (State Bar No. 321018).

Code of Civil Procedure section 2023.030 is the California statute that lists the sanctions a court may impose for misuse of the discovery process: monetary, issue, evidence, terminating, and contempt sanctions. A party that ignores two orders to produce documents faces the upper rungs of that ladder, up to dismissal or a default judgment. The court must first give notice and an opportunity for a hearing. Kolmogorov Law, P.C. represents companies and their owners in business disputes, including discovery disputes.

Call (909) 235-6116 or contact us online to discuss a discovery dispute that has reached the sanctions stage.

What counts as misuse of the discovery process

The companion section's list of misuses is not exclusive.

Failing to respond or to submit to an authorized method of discovery.
Making an evasive response, or an unmeritorious objection without substantial justification.
Disobeying a court order to provide discovery.
Making or opposing a motion to compel or to limit discovery, unsuccessfully and without substantial justification.
Using a discovery method in a way that causes unwarranted annoyance, oppression, or undue burden and expense.
Failing to confer in good faith where a discovery motion requires a meet and confer declaration.

(Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.010.) The current version, effective January 1, 2026, describes that last duty as conferring in person, by telephone, or by videoconference. Our meet and confer guide covers the requirement.

The ladder of sanctions

Section 2023.030 lists five kinds of sanction, roughly in order of severity.

Monetary. The court orders the offending party, the attorney who advised the conduct, or both to pay the reasonable expenses, including attorney's fees, that anyone incurred as a result. The same sanction can fall on a party that unsuccessfully accuses the other side of misuse. Where another provision of the discovery statutes authorizes a monetary sanction, the court must impose it unless the sanctioned party acted with substantial justification or the sanction would be unjust.

Issue. The court orders that designated facts be taken as established, or bars the offending party from supporting or opposing designated claims or defenses.

Evidence. The court bars the offending party from introducing designated matters in evidence.

Terminating. The court strikes pleadings, stays the offending party's proceedings until an order is obeyed, dismisses its action, or enters a default judgment against it.

Contempt. The court treats the misuse as a contempt of court. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.030, subds. (a), (b), (c), (d), (e).)

What a court needs before the severe sanctions

The section applies "to the extent authorized by the chapter governing any particular discovery method," so the statute for each discovery tool matters. For document demands, interrogatories, and party depositions, those statutes authorize issue, evidence, and terminating sanctions when a party fails to obey an order compelling discovery. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2025.450, subd. (h), 2030.290, subd. (c), 2031.310, subd. (i), 2031.320, subd. (c).) The sequence is a motion to compel, an order, a violation, and then a sanctions motion. Our motion to compel guide covers the first step and its deadlines.

A Court of Appeal described an incremental approach that starts with monetary sanctions and ends with termination. A terminating sanction is justified where the violation is willful, follows a history of abuse, and less severe sanctions would not produce compliance. Sanctions may not be imposed as punishment. (Doppes v. Bentley Motors, Inc. (2009) 174 Cal.App.4th 967.)

In 2024 the California Supreme Court held that a trial court may rely on sections 2023.010 and 2023.030 themselves to impose monetary sanctions. That authority may be used only for an unusual form of discovery abuse, or a pattern of abuse, that no other sanctions provision already addresses. (City of Los Angeles v. PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLP (2024) 17 Cal.5th 46.)

Notice and the sanctions motion

No sanction issues without notice to the affected party, person, or attorney and an opportunity for a hearing. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.030.) The notice of motion must identify every person, party, and attorney against whom a sanction is sought and specify the type of sanction. It must be supported by a memorandum and by a declaration setting out facts that support the amount of any monetary sanction. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.040.)

The $1,000 sanction for document discovery

A separate section adds a fixed sanction. On a request made under section 2023.040, the court must impose $1,000, payable to the requesting party and in addition to any other sanction, if it makes any of three findings. A party, person, or attorney did not respond in good faith to a document request or inspection demand. It produced the documents within seven days before the hearing on one of three listed motions to compel production, filed because of that failure. Or it failed to confer in a reasonable and good faith attempt to resolve the dispute informally.

The court may excuse the sanction on written findings of substantial justification or injustice. It may also require a sanctioned attorney to report the sanction to the State Bar within 30 days. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.050, subds. (a), (b), (c).)

If your business is the one threatened with sanctions

A monetary sanction is not imposed on a party that acted with substantial justification, or where other circumstances make it unjust. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.030, subd. (a).)

Electronically stored information has its own protection. Absent exceptional circumstances, a court may not sanction a party for failing to provide data that was lost or overwritten through the routine, good faith operation of an electronic information system. That protection does not change any duty to preserve evidence. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.030, subd. (f).) Our page on spoliation of evidence covers lost evidence.

Proportion matters as well. A sanction should be tailored to the harm the withheld discovery caused and should not exceed what is required to protect the party that was denied it. (Doppes, supra, 174 Cal.App.4th 967.) If the real concern is confidentiality, the tool is a protective order, sought promptly and not after an order has been ignored.

What to bring to the first meeting

The discovery requests and responses at issue, with proofs of service.
Every discovery order in the case and the dates set for compliance.
Meet and confer letters, emails, and notes of calls.
A list of what has been produced and what is still missing.
Any sanctions motion or notice you have received.

Frequently asked questions

The other side has ignored two court orders to produce documents. What can the judge do to them?

A great deal. In California, disobeying a discovery order is a misuse of the discovery process, and the document statutes allow issue, evidence, and terminating sanctions against a party that fails to obey an order compelling production. The court can deem facts established, exclude evidence, strike pleadings, or enter a default. A Court of Appeal has described the approach as incremental, starting with monetary sanctions.

What is CCP 2023.030?

It is the section of the California Code of Civil Procedure that lists the sanctions for misuse of the discovery process: monetary, issue, evidence, terminating, and contempt. It requires notice and an opportunity for a hearing. It also shields a party from sanctions for electronic data lost through routine, good faith system operation, absent exceptional circumstances.

What is CCP 2023.010?

Section 2023.010 of the California Code of Civil Procedure defines misuse of the discovery process. Its list, which is not exclusive, includes failing to respond, evasive responses, unjustified objections, disobeying a discovery order, losing a discovery motion without substantial justification, and failing to meet and confer. Section 2023.030 then sets out the sanctions for that conduct.

When can a California court order terminating sanctions?

A California Court of Appeal has said a terminating sanction is justified where the violation is willful, follows a history of abuse, and the evidence shows that less severe sanctions would not produce compliance. The statutes on interrogatories, document demands, and depositions tie terminating sanctions to disobedience of an order compelling discovery. Under those sections an order comes first.

We received a motion asking for sanctions against our company and our lawyer. What should we do first?

Read the notice. California law requires it to name each party and attorney targeted and the type of sanction sought, with a declaration supporting any amount. Then identify what is still outstanding and whether it can be produced before the hearing. Monetary sanctions are not imposed if the court finds substantial justification or that the sanction would be unjust.

Talk to a California civil litigation attorney

If an opponent is ignoring discovery, or your business has been served with a sanctions motion, call (909) 235-6116 or contact us online. Kolmogorov Law, P.C. is a business litigation firm in Irvine, California.

This page provides general information about California law and is not legal advice. Outcomes depend on the discovery record, the orders in the case, and the court.