Cases: Sanctions

FRCP Rule 11: Plaintiffs’ Withdrawal Of Claims By A Dismissal Without Prejudice, Through Service of A Motion to Amend Adding Other Claims, Satisfied Rule 11 Safe Harbor

Cases: Sanctions

Ninth Circuit So Holds in 2-1 Decision, Drawing a Sharp Dissent.      Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(b) has a safe harbor by which a party may deflect exposure if it timely withdraws claims identified by the opponent within 21 days after service of the safe harbor request. At issue before the Ninth Circuit was […]

CCP § 128.7 Sanctions: $20,500 Family Law Sanctions Award Reversed For Failure To Support With Admissible Evidence In Timely Fashion

Cases: Sanctions

Fourth District, Division 3 Finds The Only Timely-Filed Declaration Was Devoid In Setting Forth The Attorney Work Performed Or Credible Fee Total to Support the Award.      The next case teaches that, after service of the CCP § 128.7 “safe harbor” motion, if you then file the motion after noncompliance by the putatively sanctionable party/attorney,

Sanctions: CCP Section 128.7 Sanctions Of $20,468.06 Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: Sanctions

  Fourth District, Division 2 Finds Summary Judgment Grant Did Not Divest Trial Court of Jurisdiction to Rule on Previously Served 128.7 Sanctions Motion.      The next case reminds all litigators that some client control becomes necessary when a plaintiff contradicts the main theory of his/her complaint at a deposition. Sanctions frequently will result unless

Sanctions: CCP Section 128.7(b)(3) Sanctions Not Justified Against Represented Party Having No Responsibility For Sanctionable Conduct

Cases: Sanctions

  128.7 Sanctions Sustained Against Attorney Failing to Properly Appeal.      The next sanctions case has a couple of valuable lessons. It is MJB Development Group v. Diamond Escrow, Case No. D053158 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Feb. 10, 2010) (unpublished). Lesson #1—a sanctioned attorney must appeal the sanctions award. Although attorney’s client also appealed, this

Discovery Sanctions: $76,906.80 In Fees And Forensic Expert Expenses Awarded Jointly Against Ex-Employee And New Employer In Laptop Spoliation Case

Cases: Discovery, Cases: Sanctions

Delaware Decision Shows How Substantial E-Discovery Monetary Sanctions Can Be Imposed In Failure to Preserve Evidence Case.      Because California just recently passed e-discovery statutes, we continue to monitor cases of interest in fee and expense awards in computer spoliation cases. Here is one out of Delaware.      In Beard Research, Inc. v. Kates (Kates

Marc And Mike’s Top Twenty Decisions For 2009

Cases: Bankruptcy Efforts, Cases: Consumer Statutes, Cases: Family Law, Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5), Cases: Probate, Cases: Sanctions, Cases: SLAPP, Cases: Social Security, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Part 1 of 2: First Ten Grouping—Nos. 11-20.      As noted in an earlier post, we have accumulated our “top 20” attorney’s fees decisions, recognizing that we limit the list to published decisions and that the order reflects nothing about the importance of the decision. Rather, we try to survey decisions of interest in different

Probate: A Two-Fer From The Fourth District, Division Two

Cases: Probate, Cases: Sanctions

  Court of Appeal Examines Various Provisions on Awarding Probate Fees and on Having Trust Pay the Fee Awards.      In two somewhat companion cases, the Fourth District, Division 2 has done a nice job of examining various Probate Code statutes relating to the award of attorney’s fees and where they should be paid from.

Sanctions: Less Drastic Sanctions Than Evidentiary And Issue Sanctions Are In Order For Failing To Produce Computer Embedded Information During Trial

Cases: Discovery, Cases: Sanctions

Fourth District, Division 3 Reverses Sanctions, Ordering Reimbursement of Trial And Additional Discovery Costs.      As indicated on prior posts on e-discovery, litigators must be attuned to both pretrial, trial, and post-appeal sanctions that can be awarded against parties failing to produce computer embedded information. Here is one where the offending party got a break,

Scroll to Top