Cases: Sanctions

Costs, Sanctions: Trial Court Properly Denied CCP § 128.7 Sanctions Even Though Opposition Evidence Was Not Overwhelming; However, Costs Had To Be Awarded To Attorney Obtaining Dismissal Of Ex-Client’s Malpractice Complaint

Cases: Costs, Cases: Sanctions

Prevailing Attorney Fell Within Mandatory Category Of A Routine Costs Grant.             This next matter involved a contentious domestic, non-divorce temporary restraining order situation where an attorney sued for recovery of unpaid fees by one side (a male in a relationship with an ex-girlfriend) where there were malpractice allegations that the attorney had an affair […]

Sanctions, SLAPP: Trial Court Appropriately Issued Sanctions Against Defendant, Who Was Involved In Pending Litigation With Plaintiff, For Violation Of Restraining Order Dictating Method And Nature Of Communications With Plaintiff

Cases: Sanctions, Cases: SLAPP

Defendant’s Claims Of Litigation Privilege And Anti-SLAPP Law Protections Were No Defense Of Her Violations Of Restraining Order.             Self-represented husband and wife were involved in litigation through various lawsuits against self-represented ex-girlfriend of husband – claiming ex-girlfriend conspired with others to fraudulently obtain money, including substantial sums allegedly conned from husband.  Husband’s relationship with

Requests For Admission, Sanctions: Costs Of Proof Sanctions Affirmed Against Contestants To Will Who Denied Critical RFA Without Reasonable Ground To Believe They Could Prevail On The Matter At Trial

Cases: Requests for Admission, Cases: Sanctions

The Only One Of Four Will Contestants Who Showed For Trial Provided No Evidence To Support The Request For Admission Denial.             Estate of Moshier, Case No. G057076 (4th Dist., Div. 3 June 29, 2020) (unpublished) involved a will contest brought by decedent’s adoptive brother and three adult nieces against decedent’s wife.  Decedent’s will

Sanctions: Section 128.5 Sanctions Reversed In Second Appeal On Sanctions Issue Because Subjective Bad Faith Determination On Remand Was Made By Judge Other Than Trial Judge

Cases: Sanctions

1/2 DCA Also Concludes That An Appellate Court Is Not Bound To The Rule Of Law Of The Case Where Adherence Would Result In An Unjust Decision.             Armstrong v. Daly, Case No. A155656 (1st Dist., Div. 2 June 26, 2020) (unpublished) represents the second appeal related to a Code Civ. Proc. § 128.5

Sanctions: Sixth District Affirms Code Civ. Proc. § 128.5 Monetary Sanctions Of $8,025 Against Self-Represented Defendant Bringing Second Motion To Set Aside And Vacate 2010 Judgment

Cases: Sanctions

Defendant Dismissed Appeal Of First Order On Set Aside/Vacate Motion Before Filing Second Set Aside/Vacate Motion             In TAT Capital Partners v. Feldman, Case No. H044004 (6th Dist., June 12, 2020) (unpublished), a self-represented defendant appealed from a second trial court order denying his motion to set aside and vacate a 2010 judgment against

Appealability, Discovery, Family Law, Requests For Admission, Sanctions: Appeal Dismissed For Petitioner Who Was Dissatisfied With Trial Court’s Order On His Motion To Have Requests For Admission Deemed Admitted And For Sanctions

Cases: Appealability, Cases: Discovery, Cases: Family Law, Cases: Requests for Admission, Cases: Sanctions

The Appellate Court Has No Jurisdiction To Review A Discovery Order.             Petitioner father and respondent mother in Minasian v. Katz, Case No. A158517 (1st Dist., Div. 2 June 11, 2020) (unpublished) were involved an incredibly protracted action – dating back to 2004 – regarding their child who was born the year before.     

Sanctions, Special Fee Shifting Statutes: Prevailing CPRA Petitioner Properly Denied Fees Under Mandatory Fee-Shifting Statute And Under Code Civ. Proc. Section 128.5 Based On Her Self-Represented Status

Cases: Sanctions, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Prevailing Petitioner Was Not Represented By Legal Counsel And Did Not Incur Or Become Liable For Attorney Fees.             In Drevaleva v. Alameda Health Sytem, Case No. A158282 (1st Dist., Div. 4 May 29, 2020) (unpublished), the trial court denied prevailing CPRA (California Public Records Act) petitioner’s requests for attorney’s fees, under Gov.

Sanctions: $6,075 CCP §128.5 Sanctions Award Affirmed On Appeal In Long-Spanning Neighbor Spat

Cases: Sanctions

Plaintiff Litigant Properly Assessed With Sanctions Because Engaged In Litigation For Improper Purpose In Light of Releases Under Prior Settlement Agreement.             Beuchel v. Flanagan, Case No. B296548 (2d Dist., Div. 2 May 28, 2020) (unpublished) demonstrates, yet again, how neighborhood disputes can result in dire consequences, although the amount involved was not that bad

Probate, Request For Admissions, Sanctions: More Than $1.8 Million In CCP § 128.5 Sanctions Went POOF! On Appeal, But RFA “Cost Of Proof” Sanctions Of Over $1 Million Stuck On Appeal

Cases: Probate, Cases: Requests for Admission, Cases: Sanctions

128.5 Sanctions Went Away Because It Did Not Apply To The Action Datewise, While RFA “Sanctions” Were No Abuse Of Discretion Even Though Substantial In Nature.             First of all, we hope all of our readers are safe—this pandemic has presented unprecedented, bizarre consequences, but hope you are well.  We are happy to report that

Discovery, Sanctions: $7,862.50 Sanctions Award Against Cross-Complainant In Insurance Case Affirmed On Appeal For Presenting An Unsuccessful Motion To Augment An Expert Witness Designation

Cases: Discovery, Cases: Sanctions

Cross-Complainant’s Dilatory Conduct Justified The Sanctions Award.             Code of Civil Procedure section 2034.630 states that a trial court “shall impose a monetary sanction . . . against any party, person, or attorney who unsuccessfully makes or opposes a motion to augment or amend expert witness information, unless it finds that the one subject

Scroll to Top