Cases: Sanctions

Defendant Successfully Obtains Recovery Of Attorney’s Fees And Costs For Successfully Setting Aside A Default And Also Obtains Appellate Sanctions Based On Plaintiff’s Frivolous Appeal

Cases: Appeal Sanctions, Cases: Sanctions

Fifth District Reminds Appealing Litigants and Appellate Counsel That They Should Not “Bait and Switch” or Simply “Vent Their Spleen” Before the Appellate Courts.             The next case we discuss reinforces that appellate practice has different rules, with litigants needing to carefully assess whether they have some legal or factual errors of […]

Joined Parties To Dissolution Proceeding Ordered To Pay Attorney’s Fees To Husband’s/Wife’s Respective Attorneys Under Family Code Section 271

Cases: Sanctions

Sixth District Affirms Fee Award Against Joined Parties.             In our posts of July 7, 8, 17, and 23, 2008, we explored the attorney’s fees sanction codified in Family Code section 271.  The next case involves an interesting twist:  fee sanction awards against joined, nonspouse parties to a dissolution case.     

Attorney’s Fees Awarded As Sanctions For Losing Disqualification Motion Were Unsupportable

Cases: Sanctions

Fourth District, Division Two Reverses Fee Awards Against Defendants and Their Counsel.              Defendants and their counsel lost a motion to disqualify plaintiffs’ counsel in an unlawful detainer trial.  The trial court ordered that losing defendants and their counsel, jointly and severally, pay plaintiffs’ attorney’s fees of $8,776.25, as sanctions, under Code

E-Discovery: California State And Federal Courts Will Award Attorney’s Fees As Sanctions For Hiding or Obstructing Electronic Document Discovery

Cases: Discovery, Cases: Sanctions

Lombardo and Qualcomm Typlify Cases Sustaining Substantial Fee Awards in E-Discovery Disputes.             About a year ago, LiveOffice, an on-demand messaging security provider, released these fascinating findings based on a nationwide survey: ·         53% of 400 IT managers and consumers admitted that they were not in position to meet federal

Violation of In Limine Rulings Does Not Give Rise To Attorney’s Fees Sanctions

Cases: Sanctions, Cases: Section 998, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

First District Reverses Fee Sanctions Award and Award to State Under Code of Civil Procedure section 1038, But Affirms 998 Award to State.             This next case establishes that fee sanctions must have a firm basis in legislatively-authorized statutes (or implementing rules) that have solid due process protections.  Relying only on inherent

Sixth District Affirms $64,500 Attorney’s Fees Sanctions Awards Against Former Wife For Prosecuting Meritless Contempt and New Trial Motions

Cases: Sanctions

Fee Sanctions Awards Under Both Code of Civil Procedure section 128.7 and Family Code section 271 Sustained On Appeal.             In another July 8, 2008 post, we discussed In re MacIntyre, a First District unpublished decision affirming an approximately $12,000 attorney’s fees sanction awarded under Family Code section 271.  In the next

THIRD DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL WARNS PARTIES TO APPELLATE MEDIATIONS—NOTIFY INSURERS TO ATTEND AND ATTEND YOURSELF OR RISK PAYING THE ATTENDING PARTY’S WASTED ATTORNEY’S FEES

Cases: Mediation, Cases: Sanctions

Court of Appeal Construes Its Power to Sanction and Award Fees For Noncompliance with Local Mediation Program Dictates.             Many appellate courts, including the Third District Court of Appeal (Sacramento), have appellate mediation programs by which parties to an appeal can try to informally resolve the case either before or after briefing

Scroll to Top