Appellants Failed To Follow Trial Court Options, Or Ask For Sealing Of Financial Records Under Applicable California Rules Of Court. After a prior appeal in which the reviewing court remanded a sanctions/fee award to consider what causes of action it related to and also consider the financial circumstances of appellants as far as the […]
However, Sanctions Order Relating To Discovery Order Reversed As A Matter Of Law Based On Evolving, Unsettled Area Of The Law. In Yelp Inc. v. Superior Court, Case Nos. G054358/G054422 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Nov. 13, 2017) (published), plaintiffs successfully obtained a discovery order against Yelp compelling it to disclose documents that might reveal
U.S. Has A Global Ranking Of 18, Behind The Czech Republic And Ahead Of The Republic Of Korea. In the November 2017 issue of the ABA Journal, there is an article summarizing the results of the October 2016 edition of the Rule of Law Index, which is collected by the World Justice Project (an
Bad Faith For Purposes Of Fee-Shifting Statute Can Be Based On Circumstantial Evidence. Probate courts, at essence, are courts of equity. As such, in California, there are many Probate Code sections which allow litigants recovery of attorney’s fees and expenses. Probate Code section 859 is one of those fee-shifting provisions, allowing recoupment of fees
$118,271.74 CCP § 998 Exposure Avoided By Losing Minor. K.F. v. Los Angeles Unified School Dist., Case Nos. B276410/B277982 (2d Dist., Div. 2 Nov. 9, 2017) (unpublished) reiterates lessons for crafting a successful CCP § 998 offer, especially how one must be careful in asking for narrow releases and waiver of claims to insure
Homeowners Association—Anaheim Hills Planned Community Assn. v. Chen, Case No. G053128 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Nov. 9, 2017) (Unpublished). In this first one, homeowner appealed a trial court’s award of appellate fees to HOA in a CC&R dispute under both a prior settlement agreement and the Davis-Stirling Act. The appellate fee award of $36,830.50
Sanctions Justified, In Part, Based On Prior Inconsistent Position By Challenging Litigant. In Padron v. Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc., Case No. D070723 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Nov. 9, 2017) (published), the appellate court faced the answer to this question: Can a superior court impose a hefty daily, continuing monetary
Plaintiff Did Not Address All of the RFA Costs of Proof Sanctions Requirements, So Post-Trial Motion Denial Affirmed On Appeal. If you are an appellant on an appeal, you must focus on the trial court’s written and/or tentative decision, concentrating on showing how each basis is legally and prejudicially erroneous. Appellant’s failure to do
Deposition Extra Expenses Taxed. In Alcatel-Lucent USA v. Juniper Networks, Case No. H040819 (6th Dist. Nov. 8, 2017) (unpublished), a trial judge decided to tax certain deposition expenses for rough ASCII disks, real time feeds, streaming texts, and digital transcripts incurred within 30 days of trial. The taxed party appealed, arguing that the deposition
$240,731 Fee Award Reversed As A Matter Of Law, Because Not Dispositive Stage Ruling Had Occurred. “Prevailing party” determinations under Santisas v. Goodin, 17 Cal.4th 599, 617 (1998) [one of our Leading Cases] are especially subject to de novo review given that the facts frequently are undisputed and only legal issues are presented for
