This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
News

Mar. 26, 2026

Riff questions discovery freeze in $828M LA County abuse case

At a status conference, the judge signaled openness to lifting a yearslong discovery stay as prospective plaintiffs press for access to documents and the county urges caution.

Riff questions discovery freeze in $828M LA County abuse case
Los Angeles County Judge Lawrence P. Riff

Los Angeles County Judge Lawrence P. Riff said he would likely lift a longstanding stay on discovery in ongoing proceedings related to the landmark $828 million sex abuse settlement with Los Angeles County approved last October.

During a status conference on Wednesday, Riff noted that a request to lift the stay by prospective claimants in the settlement is the first time the stay has been challenged in the case.

"My general judicial first instinct in litigation is that there should not be a stay in discovery, and if there is a problem with propounded discovery, the Discovery Act has a lot of methods to deal with that, including motions for protective orders if something is unduly burdensome or some other legal problem arises," Riff said.

Still, Riff said he would require a formal motion from the plaintiffs after hearing arguments from the county against lifting the stay.

Senior Assistant County Counsel Jason Gonzalez previously told the Daily Journal that the stay, in place since the early days of the litigation, was directed by the court.

"The court didn't want discovery, and we recognized the reality of the situation, so we didn't say we wanted discovery," Gonzalez said in October.

However, Riff subsequently pushed back on this characterization, commenting at an Oct. 29 hearing, "I did stay discovery. If anybody wants to lift the stay, just come in and ask, and the answer is going to be 'yes.' It's not a matter of the court not wanting discovery."

The county is navigating nearly $5 billion in settlements tied to decades of abuse in its juvenile probation and foster care systems. Driven by California's AB 218, which revived expired claims, the litigation includes the contested $4 billion global resolution approved in early 2025 for about 11,000 plaintiffs and a more recent $828 million agreement reached in October 2025 for survivors of county-run camps such as Camp Joseph Scott. Jane BP1-B Doe et al. v. Doe 1 et al., 22STCV25961 (L.A. Super. Ct., filed Aug. 11, 2022)

Appearing Wednesday on behalf of "Group C" prospective future plaintiffs, Mike Grieco of Gould Grieco & Hensley said that while his team has provided information to the defense, the defense "has not been giving us any information, not issued any discovery."

Lifting the stay would enable the plaintiffs to subpoena documents from both the city and third parties, including law enforcement agencies, unions and the state of California.

"There was a representation made outside the court last status conference that discovery that had been complete in the cases of A and B both would be tendered to us," Grieco said. "That representation has since been rescinded based on an email that we received last week.

On behalf of the county, Robert J. Lee of Glaser Weil Fink Howard Jordan & Shapiro LLP in Century City denied that any such rescission took place, pledging to make the discovery material available.

"We would certainly like the opportunity to continue meeting and conferring before Your Honor makes any decisions," Lee said. "This is the first time I'm hearing of this effort to lift the stay."

"The county would oppose efforts to lift the stay as to most of those things," Lee continued.

Following the hearing, Grieco elaborated on the outstanding discovery materials the plaintiffs hope to obtain.

"We're working to get discovery [...] from other places where abuse has been reported throughout the county, at different police stations and sheriff's offices," he said. "We're trying to also get employment records from different unions that the perpetrators at these facilities have worked at, and we're also looking to get documents and inspection reports from the state of California and their various departments that have come into these facilities - were supposed to be coming into these facilities to inspect, and that there would be transparency both ways," he said.

Lee did not respond to phoned or emailed requests for additional comment following the hearing.

A further status conference is scheduled for May 12.

#390413

Skyler Romero

Daily Journal Staff Writer
skyler_romero@dailyjournal.com

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email Jeremy_Ellis@dailyjournal.com for prices.
Direct dial: 213-229-5424

Send a letter to the editor:

Email: letters@dailyjournal.com