First Half Of 2016 Saw A Large Decline. Gibson Dunn has published a mid-year 2016 review of electronically stored information (ESI) decisions in federal courts involving requests for sanctions. There has been a large decline. In the first half of 2016, there were only 32 reported decisions, 13 granting sanctions and 19 […]
Substantive Claims Were To Be Arbitrated, But Prior Discovery Disputes Before Motion To Compel Granted Remained In Superior Court. In Vlahopouliotis v. Vallarta Properties, LLC, Case No. G069832 (5th Dist. Feb. 1, 2016) (unpublished), plaintiff did win a motion to compel arbitration of substantive claims under a settlement agreement, but lost preexisting discovery
Chang v. Chang, Case No. G049309 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Sept. 29, 2015) (Unpublished; Ikola, J.).—Probate. In this and a companion appeal, the appellate court cut some surcharges to the trustee of about $345,000. Because of this companion ruling, the appellate court sent back a $187,900 fee award against trustee and in favor
Playing Racial/Religion Discrimination Card And Attacking Opposing Counsel/The Court Did Not “Play” Well For Ex-Husband In Bitter Custody Dispute. Well, this next case – Marriage of Salas and Farraj, Case No. B252053 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Sept. 1, 2015) (unpublished) – is a good lesson for family law practitioners to not play the
No Precise Linkage Between Harm and Compensatory Sanctions Required, Where Discovery Abuse Was Frequent Or Severe. This next case is a reminder of how one must be candid in discovery, with contrary positions and obstructionist litigation tactics possibly leading to large monetary sanctions against both client and client’s attorneys (as well as non-monetary
No One Prevailed in This Case, Both Trial and Appellate Courts Agreed, Under The Facts—But Prior Discovery Sanctions Award Did Survive. The California Disabled Persons Act (Civ. Code, § 54 et seq.) [DPA] does have a reciprocal fee-shifting provision in favor of a “prevailing party.” (Unlike the American with Disabilities Act [ADA], which
Deals With Third-Party Subpoena Compliance Sanctions. In our August 27, 2014 post, we discussed Vasquez v. Calif. School of Culinary Arts (an unpublished decision at the time), involving sanctions against a non-party for failing to prevail in opposing a subpoena compliance motion. We can report that this opinion was certified for publication on
Estate of Johnson, Case Nos. A134733 et al. (1st Dist., Div. 3 Sept. 18, 2014) (unpublished). An attorney was sanctioned for $7,290 (representing fees incurred by another litigant) for making a false allegation in a probate Third Amended Petition. The basis for the award was under CCP § 128.7. The award was reversed
Federal Decisions Looked to in E-Discovery Area. Vasquez v. Calif. School of Culinary Arts, Case No. B250600 (2d Dist., Div. 2 Aug. 27, 2014) (unpublished) is an example of how a litigant seeking documents from non-party Sallie Mae really set up a discovery battle very well. The litigant sent a first subpoena, drawing
Court Also Discusses Response Time When Leave Is Granted To Amend After Demurrer Hearing. Carlton v. Dr. Pepper Snapple Group, Inc., Case No. E056566 (4th Dist., Div. 2 Aug. 14, 2014) (partially published; discovery sanctions reversal unpublished) has two nice takeaways for litigators. First, although discussed in the unpublished portion, this opinion
