Cases: Sanctions

Discovery/Sanctions: Acacia Research Subsidiary Optimum Processing Solutions, L.L.C. Facing F.R.Civ. P. 37 Fees And Expenses From Atlanta Federal Court Discovery Dispute

Cases: Discovery, Cases: Sanctions

  Oops      In Optimum Processing Solutions, L.L.C. v. Intel Corp., Civ. No. 1:09-cv-1098-TCB (N.D. Ga.) [Doc. 271 filed Sept. 14, 2012), District Judge Timothy C. Batten, Sr. has decided that Acacia Research subsidiary Optimum Processing Solutions, L.L.C. (OPS) will have to pay fees and expenses under F.R.Civ. P. 37 for Intel’s motion to compel […]

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

Cases: Sanctions

       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)

Cases: Discovery, Cases: Sanctions

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/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

  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

  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      In our July 31, 2012 post, we examined Diepenbrock v. Brown, a First District, Division 3 unpublished decision reversing a protective order sanctions award based upon an unsettled marital privilege issue.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

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

Cases: Discovery, Cases: Sanctions

  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

Scroll to Top