Cases: Requests for Admission

Costs, Request For Admissions: Trial Court Properly Denied RFA Cost-Of-Sanctions Request But Erroneously Refused To Award Governmental Entity Routine Costs

Cases: Costs, Cases: Requests for Admission

  Costs Request Was Not Timely Served, Such That $13,512.81 Went To Governmental Entity On Appeal—With Rest Of The Results Sustained.      Downey Real Estate Holding, LLC v. L.A. Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Case Nos. B244647/B247931 (2d Dist., Div. 3 June 9, 2015) (unpublished) is a situation where an inverse condemnation plaintiff suffered a dismissal of […]

Requests For Admissions: Cost-Of-Proof Sanctions Are Preempted By Federal “Damages” Limitation Relating To Cable Franchising Authority/Government Involvement

Cases: Requests for Admission

  RFA “Sanctions” Are Not True Sanctions, But More Akin To Damages Or Attorney’s Fees Precluded By Federal Statute.      City of Glendale v. Marcus Cable Associates, LLC, Case No. B249094 (2d Dist., Div. 5 Mar. 18, 2015) (published) is an interesting case showing how costs-of-proof sanctions relating to California request for admissions are not

Requests for Admissions: Lower Court Denial Of “Costs of Proof” Sanctions For RFA Denials Reversed And Affirmed In Various Respects

Cases: Requests for Admission

  Unless Truly Conflicting Proof Presented To Justify Denials, Then Costs Of Proof Sanctions In Play Where Nothing Supporting Certain Blanket Denials.      Usually, the abuse of discretion standard is difficult to surmount. However, where the proof only admits of one reasonable conclusion, don’t be surprised by some reversals depending upon the circumstances, as Crowe

Requests For Admissions: Failure To Award “Costs-Of-Proof” Sanctions Was Abuse Of Discretion

Cases: Requests for Admission

  Decision Is A Primer To Show Abuse Of Discretion.      Pacific Building Development, Inc. v. Kensington-Fair Oaks Associates Joint Venture, Case No. H038685 (6th Dist. Nov. 20, 2014) (unpublished) is a good primer for any litigator wanting to appeal the denial of “cost-of-proof” sanctions under CCP § 2033.240.      Although the reversal of the

Employment/RFAS: Employee Entitled To About $135,500 In Fees/Costs Of Proof Sanctions In Defeating Employer’s Embezzlement/Conversion Claims As Well As $24,637.32 In Other Costs

Cases: Employment, Cases: Requests for Admission

  Requests for Admission Costs Of Proof Sanctions Properly Included Expert Expenses.      In Amin’s Oil, Inc. v. Indrogit Biswas, Case No. B242081 (2d Dist., Div. 8 Aug. 5, 2014) (unpublished), plaintiff employer sued defendant for embezzlement/conversion, with defendant ex-employee suing for unpaid overtime wages. Employee prevailed, eventually awarded $16,215 in wages and penalties. Then,

Requests For Admission: Lower Court Properly Denied $123,196.58 Costs Of Proof Sanctions For RFA Denial In Common Boundary Survey Dispute

Cases: Requests for Admission

  RFA Denial Was on Legal Accuracy of Survey, And On A Non-Key Issue.      Litigants in Bloxham v. Saldinger, Case No. H038040 (6th Dist. Aug. 1, 2014) (published) were involved in a common boundary line dispute, involving surveys going back as far as 1858, as well as consideration of such arcane doctrines as obliterated

Requests For Admissions/Section 998: $51,269.20 Refusal To Award Plaintiff Costs-Of-Proof Sanctions And Grant of $35,092.50 Costs Award To Defense Based On 998 Offer Rejection—Both Determinations Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: Requests for Admission, Cases: Section 998

  Lower Court Reasonably Exercised Discretion on Costs-of-Proof Sanctions Request and Correctly Found $100,000 998 Offer Was Reasonable.      In Harman v. Safeway, Inc., Case No. A134891 (1st Dist., Div. 2 June 17, 2014) (unpublished), plaintiff won a $5,060 personal injury jury verdict against Safeway after he was hit by a runaway grocery cart. Before

Requests For Admission: Denial Of Postjudgment Fees Was Error Where Plaintiff Made Stipulation Which Tacitly Demonstrated That RFA Denial Might Have Been Unjustified

Cases: Requests for Admission

  Remand In Order to See If Any Exceptions Applied.      In Mobasser v. Yermian, Case No. B247269 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Apr. 22, 2014) (unpublished), defendant appealed a lower court’s refusal to award $22,408 in postjudgment attorney’s fees based on plaintiff’s denial of a request for admission that plaintiff was not an employee. CCP

Private Attorney General/Requests for Admissions: Lower Court Correctly Denied CCP § 1021.5 Fees And Properly Awarded Petitioner $10,400 In RFA Costs-Of-Proof Sanctions While Properly Denying Defense Costs-Of-Proof Request

Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5), Cases: Requests for Admission

  End Result: $10,400 In Sanctions to Petitioner.      In Riverside Sheriffs’ Assn. v. County of Riverside, Case No. E054180 (4th Dist., Div. 2 Nov. 26, 2013) (unpublished), the lower court earlier had found that Riverside County violated a salary ordinance relating to temporary employee hiring, with the Sheriffs’ Association obtaining a writ which directed

Scroll to Top