P1054 A discovery referee's findings that a defendant intentionally and in bad faith engaged in repeated discovery abuse by breaching its agreements to produce witnesses, documents, and persons most knowledgeable, all resulting in continual delay and depriving plaintiff of the opportunity to get necessary information in time for trial was the functional equivalent of finding that defendant acted willfully, so violation of a discovery order was not a prerequisite to the imposition of sanctions; under the circumstances, evidence sanctions that resulted in jury instructions that certain issues had already been determined in plaintiff's favor were justified; since the resulting findings on those issues would justify a trier of fact in concluding that punitive damages were warranted, the trial court was justified in vacating a previous order striking plaintiff's punitive damages claim and restoring the claim; any presumption of prejudice resulting from juror misconduct that consisted of a juror's having watched a televised report about the trial and commenting on it during deliberations was found to have been rebutted by the trial court's admonishments and the jury's assurances.

KARLSSON v FORD (Evidence Sanctions) 140 CA4 1202 [See: (CCP 2023.020, 2023.030, 2025.480, 2031.310; EvC 413; Vallbona v Springer 43 CA4 1525, T/AT 5/96; Maldonado v SuperCt 94 CA4 1390, P/AT 3/02; Kuhns v State 8 CA4 982, T/AT 10/92]