In Collisson & Kaplan v. Hartunian (1994) 21 Cal. App. 4th 1611 [26 Cal. Rptr. 2d 786], the trial court imposed terminating sanctions after defendants failed to comply with one court order to produce discovery. The plaintiff served the defendants with form and special interrogatories, a demand for the production of documents, and requests for admissions. After failing to receive appropriate responses, or timely responses, the plaintiff sent the defendants numerous letters requesting compliance with the discovery. the defendants failed to respond. The plaintiff filed separate motions to compel, which the trial court granted. the court ordered the defendants to produce the requested documents and further respond to interrogatories and requests for admissions by a set date. The defendants failed to comply with the trial court's orders. ( Id. at pp. 1613-1615.) The plaintiff then filed a motion to strike the defendants' answer, which the trial court granted. ( Id. at p. 1615.) The defendants filed a motion for reconsideration and subsequently served further answers to discovery that had been propounded on them eight months earlier. The trial court granted the motion for reconsideration and " 'concluded that its order . . . striking defendants' answer and entering defendants' default is supported by the record, was correct, and should not be vacated or modified.' " ( Id. at p. 1616.) The court noted that " obtaining discovery from defendants in this case has been like pulling teeth. the discovery history speaks for itself." (Ibid.)