Cases: Sanctions

Special Fee Shifting Statute/Sanctions: Lower Court’s Award Of Attorney’s Fees To Summary Judgment Seeking Defendant Based On CRC 2.30(b) Reversed And Remanded

Cases: Sanctions, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

  Trial Judge Needed to Explore Impact of Sino Century Development Case.      In Bongan v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, Inc., Case No. A137303 (1st Dist., Div. 5 Sept. 12, 2014) (unpublished), the lower court had awarded $15,100 in attorney’s fees in favor of a defendant and against a plaintiff/her attorney under California Rules of Court, […]

Discovery/Sanctions: Party Seeking E-Discovery Entitled To $11,487 In Attorney’s Fees For Successfully Resisting Opposition to Motion To Compel Business Record Subpoena Compliance

Cases: Discovery, Cases: Sanctions

  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 School of Culinary Arts, Case No. B250600 (2d Dist., Div. 2 Aug. 27, 2014) (unpublished) is an example of how a litigant seeking documents from non-party Sallie Mae really set up a discovery battle very well.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

Section 998/Settlement: 998 Offer Geared To Entry of Judgment, Which Occurred, Meant No Additional Release Had To Be Signed By Accepting Offeree Dismissing The Action

Cases: Sanctions, Cases: Section 998

  And . . . 998 Offer Silence On Fees And Costs Resulted In Fee Recovery By Accepting Plaintiff Under Labor Code Section 218.5.      Briscoe v. The Painted Nail, Case No. B252066 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Aug. 20, 2014) (unpublished) illustrates how a CCP § 998 offeror needs to be careful in the drafting

Discovery/Sanctions: If Motion To Compel Was Untimely, Any Sanctions Awarded Related Thereto Had To Be Reversed

Cases: Discovery, Cases: Sanctions

  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Group, Inc., Case No. E056566 (4th Dist., Div. 2 Aug. 14, 2014) (partially published; discovery sanctions reversal unpublished) has two nice takeaways for litigators.      First, although discussed in the unpublished portion, this opinion

Sanctions/Contempt: England, 1631

Cases: Sanctions

High Water Mark Of The English Judge’s Contempt Powers      We report the following account of Chief Justice Richardson’s exercise of the court’s contempt power in 1631:      “Richardson, Chief Justice of C.B. at the assizes at Salisbury in the summer of 1631 was assaulted by a prisoner condemned there for felony, who after his

Sanctions: CCP § 128.7 Sanctions Against Attorney Could Not Be Entertained Where Client Alone Appealed

Cases: Sanctions

  No “Aggrieved Party” Appealed.      Attorneys in complex litigation involving a family corporation were assessed with CCP § 128.7 sanctions for filing a frivolous summary judgment motion on defendant’s behalf. Although the sanctions were originally requested against defendant and the law firm, only the law firm got hit with sanctions, and only the defendant

Arbitration/Probate/Sanctions: Trust Beneficiary Gets Hit With Settlement Agreement Fees/Costs And CCP § 128.7 Sanctions

Cases: Arbitration, Cases: Probate, Cases: Sanctions

Problem Was That Arbitrator Could Construe Settlement Agreement, While Probate Court Could Control Arbitrator Appointment Issues.             This is a case where a trust beneficiary in Estate of Buser Trust, Case No. Do63381 (4th Dist., Div. 1 July 3, 2014) (unpublished) somewhat stepped into litigation “goo,” especially where both a probate court and arbitrator were

Prevailing Party/Sanctions/Section 1717: $60,000 Sanctions Award Against Plaintiffs/Plaintiffs’ Counsel Under CCP § 128.7 Affirmed

Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Sanctions, Cases: Section 1717

Additional $60,000 Fee Recovery Against Plaintiffs For Dismissed Tort Claims Also Sustained Based On Breadth Of Fees Clause. ​ Peake v. Underwood, Case No D061267 (4th Dist., Div. 1 June 25, 2014) (partially published) is a great primer on CCP § 128.7 sanctions, on how to properly present such a sanctions request, and on the

Scroll to Top