Cases: Sanctions

Sanctions:  $34,000 In CCP § 128.5 Sanctions Affirmed Against Litigant Unsuccessfully Trying To Upset Earlier Adjudication Based Upon Extrinsic Fraud

Cases: Sanctions

Among Other Things, Damning Admissions In Debtor Exam Sealed The Deal.             In Quadri v. Alkayali, Case No. G054914 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Apr. 19, 2018) (unpublished), the 4/3 DCA—in a panel decision authored by Justice Bedsworth—affirmed around a $ 34,000 sanction against a litigant losing an “extrinsic fraud” challenge to a prior verdict.  Among […]

Sanctions:  Third District Decides That An Asserted Nonfrivolous Claim Cannot Be Found To Be Brought For An Improper Purpose Under CCP § 128.7

Cases: Sanctions

Plaintiffs Advanced A Plausible Interpretation Of A Phrase In Prior Settlement Stipulation Such That Sanctions Were Not Warranted.             In Ponce v. Wells Fargo Bank, 21 Cal.App.5th 253, Case No. C080680 (3d Dist. Mar. 13, 2018) (published), a trial judge sanctioned plaintiffs who brought lender liability claims in a residential property dispute with terminating sanctions

Appealability/Discovery/Sanctions:  Separate Discovery Sanctions Cannot Be Aggregated For Purposes Of Meeting $5,000 Appealability Threshold

Cases: Appealability, Cases: Discovery, Cases: Sanctions

Two Separate Sanctions Below $5,000 Cannot Be Aggregated For Appealability Purposes.             In Mitchell Anthony Productions, LLC v. Baron, Case No. B282974 (2d Dist., Div. 5 Mar. 28, 2018) (unpublished), the trial judge awarded $4,860 in discovery sanctions on separate motions to compel further discovery responses to the interrogatories and requests

Sanctions:  CCP § 128.7 And Family Code Section 271 Sanctions Improperly Imposed Against Attorney

Cases: Sanctions

$5,000 Sanctions Award Against Attorney Reversed.             Attorney and client her were sanctioned for $5,000 under CCP § 128.7 and Family Code § 271 in Saidiner v. Jacobs-Jakubowicz, Case No. B275860 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Mar. 26, 2018) (unpublished).  Attorney appealed the sanctions award, which was reversed on appeal. The CCP § 128.7 sanctions could

Discovery/Sanctions:  Yelp Properly Ordered To Disclose Documents Relating To Anonymous Reviewer Making Alleged Slanderous Comments

Cases: Discovery, Cases: Sanctions

However, Sanctions Order Relating To Discovery Order Reversed As A Matter Of Law Based On Evolving, Unsettled Area Of The Law.             In Yelp Inc. v. Superior Court, Case Nos. G054358/G054422 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Nov. 13, 2017) (published), plaintiffs successfully obtained a discovery order against Yelp compelling it to disclose documents that might reveal

Sanctions: Trial Court’s “Vestigial Jurisdiction” When Case Ordered To Arbitration Justified CCP § 128.7 Sanctions Against Litigant’s Counsel

Cases: Sanctions

Continuing Jurisdiction And Waiver Principles Justified Sanctions Order. Old Jail Whipping Post.  St. Augustine, Florida.  John Margolies, photographer.  Library of Congress.             Windsor Mango Way LLC v. Taylor, Case No. B268967 (2d Dist., Div. 3 Sept. 28, 2017) (unpublished) is a case where an attorney was sanctioned under CCP § 128.7 for conduct relating to

Probate Two-Fer/Sanctions:  $440,000 Fee Award Based On A Common Fund Properly Awarded Against Entire Trust Res And $16,060 In CCP § 128.7 Sanctions Sustained For Failure To Remove Lis Pendens

Cases: Sanctions

Frye v. Collins, Case No. A143623 (1st Dist., Div. 2 Aug. 9, 2017) (unpublished)             In this one, a trustee lost certain trust challenges by other relatives, also saddled with a costs/fees award of $440,000.  This award was affirmed because the lower court decided that it should be paid out of the entire trust res,

Appealability/Sanctions: Client’s Appeal Of Sanctions Only Against Her Attorneys Did Not Confer Appellate Jurisdiction To Review Sanctions Award

Cases: Appealability, Cases: Sanctions

Different Result Had Sanctions Been Imposed On Both Client And Attorney               The probate court in In re Patrice Libaw Trust, Case No. B271815 (2d Dist., Div. 1 Aug. 3, 2017) (unpublished) awarded CCP § 128.7 sanctions against only a probate litigant’s attorneys, not the probate litigant (although sanctions were requested against both).  Litigant

Sanctions: Ninth Circuit Remands To District Court The Sanctions Issue In Haeger v. Goodyear “Inherent Power Of The Court” SCOTUS Decision

Cases: Sanctions

    Dissenting Circuit Judge Would Have Affirmed Based On Waiver.               On April 23, 2017, we posted on the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Haeger, 137 S. Ct. 1178 (2017), which found that a $2.7 million “inherent power of the court” sanctions award needed a restudy based

Scroll to Top