Cases: Discovery

Sanctions: Court of Appeal Vacates Discovery Sanctions Against Defendant With Respect To Form Interrogatory Responses

Cases: Discovery, Cases: Sanctions

Second District, Division 3 Calls Into Question Whether Defense Needs to Answer Some Personal Injury Questions in Many Cases.      Discovery is the bane of most litigators’ existence. It is freely allowed (subject to certain limitations)—vacillating from tedious and time consuming (at one pole) to burdensome and extremely expensive (at the other side of the […]

Discovery Sanctions: $6,000 In Discovery Sanctions Affirmed Against Alter Ego Defendant For Failing To Respond To Written Discovery

Cases: Discovery, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees, Cases: Sanctions

Second District, Division Two Discusses Aggregation Appealability Rule and Litigant’s Discovery Obligations.      The next case we discuss has an interesting discussion of the aggregation appealability rule (sanctions order must exceed $5,000) and a litigant’s discovery obligations (even an alter ego defendant must provide discovery information of which he is aware, even if the defendant

Sanctions: Evidence and Adverse Jury Instruction Sanctions Not Allowed For Document Production Transgression Absent Failure To Obey An Order Compelling A Further Response

Cases: Discovery, Cases: Sanctions

Second District, Division Three Decides Sanctions Unwarranted Because The Underlying Conduct Was Not Egregious in Nature.      In New Albertsons, Inc. v. Superior Court (Shanahan), Case No. B207661 (2d Dist., Div. 3 Dec. 10, 2008) (certified for publication), the Court of Appeal—in a 3-0 opinion authored by Presiding Justice Croskey—issued mandate to allow withdrawal and

Discovery Sanctions: Litigant Not Awarded Additional Sanctions Where Request Was Only Contained At The Conclusion of the Supporting Memorandum

Cases: Discovery, Cases: Sanctions

  Second District, Division One Finds No Abuse of Discretion In Denying Further Sanctions.      In our October 14, 2008 post, we reviewed The Capital Gold Group v. Michael Thomas Media Group, a Second District, Division 5 decisions reversing a sanctions award because the notice of motion for sanctions failed to identify the object of

Discovery Sanctions Orders Against Counsel Reversed Because Notices Of Sanctions Motions Were Not Sufficiently Certain In Identifying The Objects Of The Sanctions Requests

Cases: Discovery, Cases: Sanctions

Second District, Division Five Reverses Discovery Sanctions Imposed Against Client and Its Law Firm.      The next case is a good reminder that discovery sanctions motions need to be explicit in mentioning the persons against whom the sanctions are directed in the actual motion. Failure to be precise in this context may mean that an

Fifth District Affirms Most Respects Of A FEHA Attorney Fee Remand Proceeding, But Does Not Award Plaintiffs Payment At The Top Permissible Rate For All Hours Claimed By The Attorneys

Cases: Billing Record Substantiation, Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Discovery, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

Court of Appeal Sustains Reductions by Trial Court and Suggests That Fees Expended by the Opposition Has Probative Value in Fee Proceedings.             In Horsford v. Board of Trustees of California State University (Horsford I), 132 Cal.App.4th 359, 402 (2005), the Fifth District Court of Appeal determined a trial court had applied

Sixth District Demonstrates Application Of Abuse of Discretion Standard … But Also Speaks Out On Whether Opposition’s Fees Are Probative In Fee Proceedings

Cases: Discovery, Cases: Standard of Review

Court of Appeal Sustains Lower Court Determination That Opposition Fee Effort Does Not Have To Be Considered.             Plaintiff and defendants settled a Home Equity Sales Contract Act case that crops up frequently in this age of subprime lender fallout cases.  A settlement was reached by which the trial court was imbued

E-Discovery: California State And Federal Courts Will Award Attorney’s Fees As Sanctions For Hiding or Obstructing Electronic Document Discovery

Cases: Discovery, Cases: Sanctions

Lombardo and Qualcomm Typlify Cases Sustaining Substantial Fee Awards in E-Discovery Disputes.             About a year ago, LiveOffice, an on-demand messaging security provider, released these fascinating findings based on a nationwide survey: ·         53% of 400 IT managers and consumers admitted that they were not in position to meet federal

Discovery Referee Orders–They Can’t Be Issued Ex Parte and Cannot Order Litigant to Pay Referee Fees/Costs in Absence of Noticed Motion

Cases: Discovery

Fourth District, Division Three Issues Mandate to Reverse Contrary Ex Parte Order.             The Fourth District, Division Three, in Clayton v. Superior Court, Case No. G040482 (4th Dist., Div. 3 June 27, 2008) (unpublished “by the court” decision), issued a writ of mandate overturning an ex parte order appointing a discovery referee

Scroll to Top