§ 2023.050.Monetary sanctions; failure to respond in good faith to document request; production
Title 4. Civil Discovery Act · Chapter 7. Sanctions · Last amended 2024 · Last verified July 29, 2026
In one sentenceSection 2023.050 requires a court to impose a mandatory $1,000 sanction when a party, person, or attorney fails to respond in good faith to a document request or inspection demand, produces documents only in the days just before a compel-production hearing, or fails to meet and confer, subject to a substantial-justification excuse and a good-faith presumption for unrepresented individuals.
(a)Notwithstanding any other law, and in addition to any other sanctions imposed pursuant to this chapter, a court shall impose a one-thousand-dollar ($1,000) sanction, payable to the requesting party, upon a party, person, or attorney if, upon reviewing a request for a sanction made pursuant to Section 2023.040, the court finds any of the following:
(1)The party, person, or attorney did not respond in good faith to a request for the production of documents made pursuant to Section 2020.010, 2020.410, 2020.510, or 2025.210, or to an inspection demand made pursuant to Section 2031.010.
(2)The party, person, or attorney produced requested documents within seven days before the court was scheduled to hear a motion to compel production of the records pursuant to Section 2025.450, 2025.480, or 2031.320 that is filed by the requesting party as a result of the other party's, person's, or attorney's failure to respond in good faith.
(3)The party, person, or attorney failed to confer in person, by telephone, letter, or other means of communication in writing, as defined in Section 250 of the Evidence Code, with the party or attorney requesting the documents in a reasonable and good faith attempt to resolve informally any dispute concerning the request.
(b)Notwithstanding paragraph (3) of subdivision (o) of Section 6068 of the Business and Professions Code, the court may, in its discretion, require an attorney who is sanctioned pursuant to subdivision (a) to report the sanction, in writing, to the State Bar within 30 days of the imposition of the sanction.
(c)The court may excuse the imposition of the sanction required by subdivision (a) if the court makes written findings that the one subject to the sanction acted with substantial justification or that other circumstances make the imposition of the sanction unjust.
(d)Sanctions pursuant to this section shall be imposed only after notice to the party, person, or attorney against whom the sanction is proposed to be imposed and opportunity for that party, person, or attorney to be heard.
(e)For purposes of this section, there is a rebuttable presumption that a natural person acted in good faith if that person was not represented by an attorney in the action at the time the conduct that is sanctionable under subdivision (a) occurred. This presumption may only be overcome by clear and convincing evidence.
Plain-English Summary
This section layers a separate, fixed penalty on top of whatever other sanctions Chapter 7 already allows, aimed squarely at a specific pattern of gamesmanship around document production. A court must order a $1,000 sanction, paid to the party who requested the documents, if it finds any of three things: the responding party, person, or attorney did not respond in good faith to a document request or inspection demand; that party produced the requested documents only within the seven days before a hearing on a motion to compel that production, one filed because of the earlier failure to respond in good faith; or that party failed to confer in good faith about the request before the motion was filed. The pattern the section targets is familiar to anyone who has litigated a motion to compel: a party stonewalls a document request, forces the other side to prepare and file a motion, and then produces the documents at the last minute, mooting the motion but leaving the requesting party to absorb the cost of preparing it anyway.
The section builds in both an escape hatch and an added consequence. A court can excuse the sanction on written findings that the party or attorney acted with substantial justification or that imposing it would otherwise be unjust, and it can, at its discretion, order a sanctioned attorney to report the sanction to the State Bar within 30 days. Because the sanction is aimed at bad faith rather than simple error, the section presumes that a natural person who was not represented by an attorney at the time acted in good faith, a presumption the requesting party can only overcome with clear and convincing evidence. As with every sanction in this chapter, it can only be imposed after notice to the party or attorney facing it and an opportunity to be heard.
Frequently Asked Questions
What conduct triggers the mandatory $1,000 sanction under Section 2023.050?
A bad faith failure to respond to a document request or inspection demand, producing the documents only in the seven days before a compel-production hearing caused by that failure, or failing to confer in good faith about the request.
Can a court excuse this sanction?
Yes, if it makes written findings that the party or attorney acted with substantial justification or that imposing the sanction would otherwise be unjust.
Can this sanction lead to a report to the State Bar?
Yes. The court may, in its discretion, require a sanctioned attorney to report the sanction, in writing, to the State Bar within 30 days.
Does this $1,000 sanction replace other discovery sanctions available under this chapter?
No. It is imposed in addition to any other sanctions authorized under Chapter 7.
Are self-represented individuals treated differently under this section?
Yes. A natural person who was not represented by an attorney when the conduct occurred benefits from a rebuttable presumption of good faith, one the requesting party can only overcome with clear and convincing evidence.
Amendment History
(Added by Stats.2019, c. 836 (S.B.17), § 2, eff. Jan. 1, 2020. Amended by Stats.2023, c. 284 (S.B.235), § 3, eff. Jan. 1, 2024.)
Source & verification. Section text is reproduced verbatim from
the West's Annotated California Codes / Thomson Reuters. Enacted by the California Legislature.
Last verified July 29, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as:ccp 2023.050 mandatory 1000 sanctionbad faith document production sanction californialast minute document production before hearing sanction