Cases: Discovery

Appeal Sanctions, Discovery: Denial Of Discovery Sanctions Was Nonappealable, $1,500 Discovery Sanctions Was Nonappealable, And $6,500 Discovery Sanctions Was No Abuse Of Discretion

Cases: Appeal Sanctions, Cases: Discovery

Appellant’s Counsel Assessed With Frivolous Appeal Sanctions Of $30,000 Morales v. City and County of San Francisco, Case No. A170154 (1st Dist., Div. 3 Sept. 4, 2025) (published) highlights a lesson for all practitioners: sometimes it is better not to appeal non-appealable orders and not to challenge discovery rulings, which are by and large discretionary […]

Discovery, Family Law: $165,188.75 Needs-Based Award To Ex-Wife Reversed Because Lower Court Failed To Consider Whether Her Discovery Efforts Were Unreasonable Or Over Litigated

Cases: Discovery, Cases: Family Law

Record Below Showed The Lower Court Pulled The Trigger Too Fast.                Tragni v. Tragni, Case No. A169130 (1st Dist., Div. 5 Aug. 12, 2025) (unpublished) is one of those rare cases where a needs-based family law award to an ex-wife was reversed for an abuse of discretion.  We now explore why.                Ex-wife received

Discovery: Post PricewaterhouseCoopers Supreme Court Decision, 2/3 DCA Decides That $9,981 Sanctions Award Against Third-Party Witness Was Justified

Cases: Discovery

Sanctions Fell Within “Unusual Forms Of Discovery Dispute” Situations Encompassed In PricewaterhouseCoopers Decision.                In City of Los Angeles v. PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLP, 17 Cal.5th 46, 72-74 (2024), the California Supreme Court determined that the inherent authority of the court could allow for imposition of discovery sanctions, independent of express Discovery Act provisions, where there were

Discovery, Sanctions: Discovery Sanctions Reversed Where Moving Party Failed To Comply With Late Discovery Motion Dictates After The Discovery Cut-Off Date And Before Trial

Cases: Discovery, Cases: Sanctions

CCP §§ 2024.020, 2024.050 Were Not Complied With, And That Was Prejudicial.                In Cooke v. Tayac, Case No. A170044 (1st Dist., Div. 4 Dec. 12, 2024) (unpublished), defendants moved for discovery sanctions after the discovery cut-off and formal close of discovery.  The lower court granted the defense motion for sanctions in the amount of

Discovery, Sanctions: Appellate Court Determines That Litigant Not Filing A Written Opposition To A Discovery Sanctions Motion Is Not Guaranteed A Right To Oral Argument

Cases: Discovery, Cases: Sanctions

Nothing In The Discovery Sanctions Or Other Law Mandates That Result.                A cross-complainant in Bogota Corp. v. Seiden, Case No. B332296 (2d Dist., Div. 1 Nov. 22, 2024) (unpublished) had discovery sanctions imposed for deficient special interrogatory responses after filing no written opposition to the discovery sanctions motion.  On appeal, he argued that he

Discovery: California Supreme Court Decides That General Discovery Statutes Allow A Trial Judge, Where Specific Discovery Sanctions Statutes Do Not Cover Egregious Discovery Abuses, To Inherently Impose Monetary Sanctions For Abuses

Cases: Discovery

However, Notice/Causation/Reasonableness Principles Are Still In Play, Just Under Specific Discovery Abuse Statutes.                In City of Los Angeles v. Pricewaterhousecoopers, LLP, Case No. S277211 (Cal. Supreme Ct. Aug. 22, 2024) (published), the California Supreme Court decided that the general sections of the Civil Discovery Act, CCP § 2023.010 and § 2023.030, allow a trial

Discovery: $4,508 In Attorney’s Fees Awarded Against MyPillow Mogul Mike Lindell In November 2020 Election Case Resulting In An Earlier $5 Million Adverse Judgment

Cases: Discovery

Fee Request Reduced For Excessive Hourly Rates And For Overbroad Discovery Requests.                In an August 8, 2024 post by some writers for the Business Insider, they report that MyPillow mogul Mike Lindell—who supposedly offered to pay $5 million to any person who could disprove his cyber data and other data relating to the November

Discovery, Sanctions: $9,495 In Sanctions Against Client And Her Attorney For Failing To Reasonably Meet And Confer On Discovery Disputes Was Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: Discovery, Cases: Sanctions

Unpublished Opinion Has A Discussion On What Not To Do In The Meet And Confer Battles.                In Estate of Ambrose-Gordon, Case Nos. A169189 et al. (1st Dist., Div. 5 June 24, 2024) (unpublished), a probate litigant and her attorney were sanctioned $9,495 in discovery sanctions for failing to reasonably meet and confer with the

Discovery: 1/4 DCA Considers Some First Impression Issues Relating To Deposition Third-Party Subpoena Awards In Marital Dissolution Case

Cases: Discovery

60-Day Deadline To Compel Runs From Proper Service Of The Subpoena, No Separate Statement Absolutely Required If Motion Provides A Road Map, And Post-Motion Meet And Confer Discovery Efforts Are Not Compensable As A Cost In Bringing A Motion To Compel.                Marriage of Moore, Case No. A165038 (1st Dist., Div. 4 May 21, 2024)

Costs, Discovery: Court Of Appeal Found Nothing Wrong In Allowing Recovery Of Routine Costs For Filing Discovery Motions, Even If They Were Unsuccessful And Costs/Fees Were Denied Against Defendants In The Discovery Proceedings

Cases: Costs, Cases: Discovery

No Authority Shown To Conclude Otherwise, With Routine Costs And Actual Discovery Sanctions Serving Distinct Purposes.                In BBBB Bonding Corp. v. Pilling-Miller, Case Nos. H050703 et al. (6th Dist. May 10, 2024) (unpublished), plaintiff lost trade secret misappropriation and related claims, with costs of $34,989 out of a requested $44,989 awarded to the prevailing

Scroll to Top