Cases: Sanctions – Page 26 – Cal Attorneys Fees

Sanctions: Attorney’s Fees As Sanctions Under CRC 2.30 Only Authorized For Fees Incurred In Sanctions Proceedings, Not Fees Incurred As A Result Of Underlying CRC Rule Violations

December 3, 2012

In Sino Century Development Ltd. v. Farley, Case No B236912 (2d Dist., Div. 3 Dec. 3, 2012) (published), a trial judge imposed $81,461.13 in sanctions upon a defendant and his counsel under California Rule of Court 2.30, which authorizes “reasonable monetary sanctions” to be awarded to a party by a person failing without […]

Discovery/Sanctions: Ninth Circuit Reverses $28,181.10 Sanctions Order Under F.R.Civ.P. Rule 45(c)(1)

November 27, 2012

Cost Of Complying With Subpoena By Third Party Was Minimal And Subpoena Was Not Issued In Bad Faith Or Was Not Facially Defective Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45(c)(1) allows a district judge issuing a subpoena to award appropriate sanctions, including lost earnings and reasonable attorney’s fees, against a party or attorney responsible for

Sanctions: $354 Million Contempt Judgment Against Marcos Estate Affirmed By Ninth Circuit

Cases: Sanctions

October 28, 2012

$100,000 Per Day Penalty Also Sustained. As reported by Leigh Jones in an October 25, 2012 post at The National Law Journal, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently upheld a $354 million contempt judgment against the Estate of Ferdinand Marcos and in favor of a human rights class action group in a

Sanctions: Ninth Circuit Decides That Consumer Loss Can Be Used To Calculate Contempt Sanctions In FTC Proceedings

Cases: Sanctions

August 29, 2012

Ninth Circuit Follows the View of Seventh, Tenth, and Eleventh Circuits on the Issue. In FTC v. EDebitPay, LLC, Case No. 11-55431 (9th Cir. Aug. 28, 2012) (published), the Ninth Circuit followed the viewpoints of the Seventh, Tenth and Eleventh Circuits in holding that district courts can consider consumer loss in calculating sanctions

Sanctions/Special Fee-Shifting Statute: Eleventh Circuit Decision In Shaygan Is A Sharply Split Decision On Interpretation of Hyde Amendment

Cases: Sanctions, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

August 24, 2012

Defendant’s Attorneys Seeking Certiorari Grant by U.S. Supreme Court, With Several Amici Curiae Briefs Having Been Filed in Support of Defendant’s Position. In 1997, the Hyde Amendment was enacted, giving federal district judges the authority to award fees and other expenses to criminal defendants proving gross misconduct on the part of federal prosecutors

Discovery/Sanctions: Diepenbrock Decision Is Now Published

Cases: Discovery, Cases: Sanctions

August 21, 2012

Reversal of Sanctions Award Now Published, Showing Unsettled Law on Scope of Marital Privilege. In our July 31, 2012 post, we examined Diepenbrock v. Brown, a First District, Division 3 unpublished decision reversing a protective order sanctions award based upon an unsettled marital privilege issue. We can now report that the opinion was

Sanctions: Contempt Of Court Jail Time And $1,000 Fine Vacated Through Peremptory Writ

Cases: Sanctions

August 10, 2012

CCP § 177.5 Sanctions of $1,500 Also Vacated. Pori v. Superior Court, Case No. A135181 (1st Dist., Div. 1 Aug. 8, 2012) (unpublished) is an interesting case where the appellate court vacated contempt and CCP § 177.5 sanctions award against a criminal defense attorney in a peremptory writ proceeding. Defense attorney apparently

Consumer Statutes/Sanctions: $2,301.95 Fee/Costs Award To Plaintiff Accepting Rule 68 Offer Reversed

Cases: Consumer Statutes, Cases: Sanctions

August 1, 2012

District Judge Failed to Gauge Success Where Small Amount At Issue, Requiring a Lodestar Reanalysis on Remand. The Ninth Circuit in Evon v. Law Offices of Sidney Mickell, Case No. 10-16615 et al. (9th Cir. Aug. 1, 2012) (published) dealt with a plaintiff suing a collecting law firm under the Fair Debt Collection

Discovery/Sanctions: $5,000 Sanctions For Unsuccessfully Opposing A Protective Order On Marital Privilege Issue Reversed

Cases: Discovery, Cases: Sanctions

July 31, 2012

Substantial Justification for Opposition Given Unsettled Law on Scope of Marital Privilege. Plaintiff and her attorney were sanctioned $5,000 for unsuccessfully opposing a protective order motion brought by a third-party attempting to protect certain information from discovery under the marital privilege. The trial court thought the law clear on the issue and sanctioned

Sanctions: District Judge May Consider Attorney’s Ability To Pay In Imposing Sanctions On Attorney Under 28 U.S.C. § 1927

Cases: Sanctions

July 25, 2012

Substantial Sanctions Remanded for Exercise of Discretion Because District Judge Did Not Believe It Had Authority To Reduce For Impecuniousness Concerns. The Ninth Circuit in Haynes v. City & County of San Francisco, Case Bi, 10-16327 (9th Cir. July 23, 2012) (published) faced review of a $362,545.61 sanctions award against an attorney pursuing