The moving defendants sought sanctions after the first plaintiff failed to comply with earlier court orders requiring answers to undertakings and refused questions from discovery and payment of previously ordered motion costs.
The court considered Rules 57.03 and 60.12 of the Rules of Civil Procedure governing costs enforcement and sanctions for non‑compliance with interlocutory orders.
Although some progress toward compliance occurred and the delay was partly explained by counsel’s involvement in a lengthy trial and administrative issues with payment of photocopying invoices, the court found prolonged non‑compliance with two court orders.
The court held that the defendants were justified in bringing the motion and were more affected by the delay than responsible for it.
Costs of the motion were awarded against the first plaintiff.
