FOLLOW US

A California federal judge on Wednesday sanctioned an attorney representing Kern County and its sheriff’s office for bad faith conduct during discovery in a lawsuit over 500 acres of bulldozed hemp crops, saying the lawyer’s arguments reveal a fundamental misunderstanding of his duties.

In his order, U.S. Magistrate Judge Christopher D. Baker reprimanded John R. Whitefleet of Porter Scott Attorneys, calling his claims that none of his clients’ emails were relevant to the case brought by Apothio LLC “alarming and astounding.”

The sanctions accompany Apothio’s third motion to compel after the court found that Whitefleet and his clients failed to comply with prior orders to produce documents critical to the company’s allegations that Kern County and state regulators conspired to bulldoze its hemp crop.

Background: Bulldozed Hemp and Legal Battles

Apothio’s amended complaint filed in May 2022 alleges that the Kern County Sheriff’s Office colluded with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, securing a warrant based on false information and destroying 500 acres of crops before Apothio could seek a court injunction.

In August, U.S. District Judge Jennifer L. Thurston partially dismissed the complaint but allowed Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment claims to proceed. She later dismissed the Fourteenth Amendment claims in February, finding state law remedies were adequate.

Judge Baker Rejects Defendants’ Discovery Excuses

Judge Baker dismissed the county’s arguments that Apothio failed to meet and confer before filing its latest motion, noting a history of stonewalling and grudging compliance. He found that the defendants failed to diligently search for and produce relevant materials, relying on Whitefleet’s vague “understanding” that they had done so.

Whitefleet had claimed emails were irrelevant because they did not explicitly reference the warrant, its execution, or the destruction of crops. The judge called this a “strained argument”, highlighting the attorney’s misunderstanding of discovery obligations.

He also rejected Whitefleet’s assertion that the sheriff’s office maintains a policy of destroying evidence, emphasizing that operations plans and other materials must be preserved for potential criminal proceedings.

Sanctions and Court Orders

Judge Baker ordered Whitefleet to pay $3,000 in sanctions, which cannot be passed on to his clients, and required the county to cover Apothio’s reasonable expenses stemming from the discovery failures. The court also mandated the immediate production of all responsive documents.

“It is regrettable that the court is compelled to direct defendants to produce information that appears potentially responsive,” the judge wrote. “However, defendants have left the court with no other viable options… the court is unwilling any further to permit defendants to unreasonably consume both plaintiff’s and the court’s time, energy, and limited resources.”