Cases: Sanctions

Discovery, Sanctions: Failure To Designate The Deposition Video In The Appellate Court Doomed Challenge To $11,000 Sanction For Unilaterally Terminating A Videotaped Deposition

Cases: Discovery, Cases: Sanctions

Motion To Augment The Record To Include The Video, One Day After The Appellate Argument, Was Deemed Untimely.             Genesis Media, LLC v. Misle, Case No. B294620 (2d Dist., Div. 3 Sept. 10, 2019) (unpublished) is an appeal from a discovery sanction where an inadequate appellate record and untimely motion to augment sealed the fate […]

Sanctions: 1/1 DCA Clarifies That Subjective Bad Faith Is Required Under CCP § 128.5, With Only Objective Bad Faith Required Under CCP § 128.7

Cases: Sanctions

San Diegans for Open Government Decision Is No Longer Good Law Under Section 128.5.             Looks like Marriage of Sahafzadeh-Taeb and Taeb, Case No. A152178 (1st Dist., Div. 1 Aug. 26, 2019) (published) has finally clarified the differences in “bad faith” now required for the version of CCP § 128.5 in effect under 2017 urgency

Sanctions: Failure To Raise Safe Harbor Argument In Opposition To CCP § 128.5 Sanctions Before Judicial Referee Was A Waiver

Cases: Sanctions

However, A Waiver—But Only One Endorsed Through A 2-1 Panel Opinion Split By The 2/5 DCA.             1100 Wilshire Property Owners Assn. v. Wilshire Commercial LLC, Case No. B285336 (2d Dist., Div. 5 Aug. 23, 2019) (unpublished) is a case where a court-appointed referee sanctioned plaintiff HOA $31,065 for taking a frivolous legal position in

Family Law, Sanctions: Father Making Another Sanctions Motion After Trial Judge Already Ruled On Prior Request Was Properly Denied

Cases: Family Law, Cases: Sanctions

“A Party Cannot Be Sanctioned Twice For the Same Misconduct.”            Presiding Justice Gilbert, who has a unique writing style, summed up the “end result” in Marriage of Anka & Yeager, Case No. B289610 (2d Dist., Div. 6 Aug. 19, 2019) (unpublished) this way: “A party cannot be sanctioned twice for the same misconduct.”            

Prevailing Party, Sanctions, Special Fee Shifting Statute: Motel Owner And City Properly Found To Not Have Prevailed For Purposes Of Substandard Building Fee-Shifting Statute

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Sanctions, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Also, Motel Owner Properly Hit With Opposition Fees For Denied CCP § 128.5 Motion.             In City of South Lake Tahoe v. Cobrae, Case No. C083568 (3d Dist. Aug. 5, 2019) (unpublished), City of South Lake Tahoe filed a petition seeking appointment of a receiver against a motel owner based on allegations that he had

Sanctions, Section 1717: Failure To Provide Safe Harbor Notice And Combining 1717 Fee Request With Sanctions Motion Rendered $176,869 Award Infirm

Cases: Sanctions, Cases: Section 1717

Prelitigation Conduct Does Not Justify 128.5 Sanctions Award, But Combo Motion Also Justified The Result.             In Broadcast Music, Inc. v. Structured Asset Sales, LLC (Currency Corp.), Case Nos. B272418/B278379 (2d Dist., Div. 2 July 30, 2019) (unpublished), the appellate court reversed a $176,869 CCP § 128.5 sanctions award against a client represented by co-contributor

Sanctions: $16,000 CCP § 128.7 Sanction Against Successor Counsel, Based On Motion Not Specifying The Improper Conduct Before He Formally Substituted In, Was Reversed

Cases: Sanctions

Simply Filing A Declaration Saying “Retained” Was Not Tantamount To Presentation Of Complaint Filed By Predecessor Counsel.            Timing can be everything, and it was in the next case considering a CCP § 128.7 sanctions award in Primo Hospitality Group, Inc. v. Haney, Case No. B283030 (2d Dist., Div. 5 July 5, 2019) (published).            

Sanctions: Although Lower Court’s CCP § 128.5 Order Failed To Be Sufficiently Detailed In Writing, Bad Faith Finding Became Law Of The Case For The Remand Proceeding

Cases: Sanctions

$6,400 Sanctions Award Against Attorney Was At Issue For Going Away On A European Vacation Rather Than Reporting For Trial.             In Mid-Centry Insurance Company v. Mazarei, Case No. G056643 (4th Dist., Div. 3 June 27, 2019) (unpublished), plaintiff insurer was suing to recoup defense expenses to an insured, with the lower court determining that

Sanctions: $35,000 Sanctions Order Payable By Plaintiffs’ Attorney To Opposing Defense Counsel Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: Sanctions

Plaintiffs’ Counsel Wanted Sanctions Award “Offset” Against Judgment Obtained By Counsel For Fees Judgment Adverse To His Clients, But It Was Not In The Cards!             Talk about an interesting card game, the next case—Petrik v. Mahaffey & Associates (Berger Kahn), Case No. G055779 (4th Dist., Div. 3 June 25, 2019) (unpublished)—exemplifies this in spades.

Sanctions: Respondents Concede That $1,110 Sanctions Award Against Opponent Had To Be Reversed Under CCP § 128.5

Cases: Sanctions

2/2 DCA Follows Sister Division 7’s Reasoning In Nutrition Distribution.             In Kleidman v. Hilton & Hyland Real Estate, Inc., Case No. B285692 (2d Dist., Div. 2 April 26, 2019) (unpublished), $1,100 in sanctions were awarded against appellant and in favor of respondents based on a request in a motion to strike costs. Commendably, respondents

Scroll to Top