Cases: Sanctions

Sanctions: 2/2 DCA Establishes A “Bright Line” Rule That A CCP § 128.5 Motion Cannot Be Heard Any Sooner Than 22 Days After Motion Service So The Full 21-Day Safe Harbor Period Is Honored

Cases: Sanctions

Also, The Appellate Court Denied Request For Substantial Appellate Fees Based On The Law Of The Case/Waiver Doctrines.             Broadcast Music, Inc. v. Structured Asset Sales, LLC, Case Nos. B304809/B306245 (2d Dist., Div. 2 Feb. 24, 2022) (published) has two interesting additions to jurisprudence in the appellate fees and 128.5 sanctions areas, tethered to the […]

Sanctions: Monetary Sanctions Of $11,562.50 Imposed Against Plaintiff’s Counsel For Frivolous Motion To Recall Remittitur To Clarify That SLAPP Defendants Were Precluded From Recovering Appellate Fees Because Each Party Was Ordered To Bear Its Own Costs

Cases: Sanctions

The 2/4 DCA Found That Any Reasonable Attorney Would Have Expected It To Follow Its Decision In Stratton Which Specifically Held That An Appellate Court’s Directive That Parties Are To Bear Their Own Costs On Appeal Does Not Preclude Award Of Appellate Attorney Fees.             In a previous appeal filed by both plaintiff and defendants,

Sanctions: 1/5 DCA Affirms $11,900 In CCP 128.5 and 128.7 Sanctions Against Defendants In Partition Action Who Pursued Quiet Title Despite Having Previously Lost Quiet Title Action At Appellate And Lower Levels

Cases: Sanctions

Pursuant To The Law Of Preclusion, Defendants’ Conduct Was Sanctionable Where They Filed A New Complaint, Based On The Same Facts, To Relitigate Issues They Had Already Lost Through Previous Litigation.             In U.S. Bank Nat. Assn. v. Rosenblum, Case No. A161511 (1st Dist., Div. 5 February 23, 2022) (unpublished), the trial court issued Code

Discovery, Sanctions: No Abuse Of Discretion In Trial Court’s Order Issuing $6,150 In Sanctions Against Defendant For Failure To Timely Respond To Two Sets Of Discovery Requests Served By Email.

Cases: Discovery, Cases: Sanctions

Defendant Did Not Claim Email Service Was Improper Or That Discovery Requests Had Not Been Received, And Did Not Demonstrate That It Acted With Substantial Justification Or That The Sanctions Were Unjust Or Unreasonable.             Personal injury defendant appealed the trial court’s order issuing $6,150 in sanctions against it – $3,075 each for defendant’s failure

Sanctions: Imposition of Sanctions Under Former CCP § 128.5 Reversed Where Sanctions Imposed In 2006 Case Because Former Provision Applied to Pre-1995 Cases

Cases: Sanctions

Small Sanctions Award Reversed As To Plaintiffs, But Not As To Their Attorney Who Failed To Join The Appeal.             There is a lesson for litigation attorneys in this one, with respect to making sure you join an appeal by a client who is hit with statutory sanctions.             Plaintiffs and attorney were hit with

Family Law, Sanctions: Sixth District Affirms Trial Court’s Imposition Of $2,520 In Section 271 Sanctions Against Husband And Denial Of Husband’s Request For $100 Million In Sanctions Against Wife And Her Attorney

Cases: Family Law, Cases: Sanctions

Husband’s Conclusory Assertions Of Trial Court Error With No Record On Appeal, No Supporting Argument Nor Legal Authority, And His Failure To Have Followed Statutory Procedure In The Lower Court Doomed His Appeal.             In Marriage of Joe and Lee, Case No. H047392 (6th Dist., January 7, 2022) (unpublished), the trial court awarded wife $2,520

Sanctions: $28,882.29 CCP § 128.7 Sanctions Award Reversed On Appeal

Cases: Sanctions

Plaintiff Made A Plausible, Nonfrivolous Argument That The Statute Of Limitations Did Not Bar An Action.             In Kumar v. Ramsey, Case No. C092610 (3d Dist. Nov. 29, 2021) (published), plaintiff was socked with CCP § 128.7 sanctions of $28,882.29 because the lower court believed that the action clearly was time barred under the applicable

Appeal Sanctions, Sanctions, Settlement: No Abuse Of Discretion In Trial Court’s Order Sanctioning Plaintiffs $10,000 For Failure To Execute Settlement Agreement

Cases: Appeal Sanctions, Cases: Sanctions, Cases: Settlement

The Record Reflected That The Parties Agreed In Open Court To Put The Oral Settlement Agreement In Writing And That Deadlines For Payment Of Settlement Funds Would Be Triggered By Full Execution Of The Written Settlement Agreement.             In Tricoast Builders v. Frederick, Case No. B307825 (2d Dist., Div. 6 October 18, 2021) (unpublished), homeowner

Discovery, Sanctions: 1/3 DCA Affirms $7,550 Sanctions Award Against Defendant And Her Attorney

Cases: Discovery, Cases: Sanctions

Unpublished Opinion Has Good Discussion Of Discovery Sanctions Burdens And Need To Reasonably Engage In Meet And Confer Discovery Sessions.              Price-Simms, LLC v. Gallegos (Fry), Case No. A160893 (1st Dist. Div. 1 Oct. 6, 2021) (unpublished) is a situation where the appellate court affirmed a $7,550 discovery sanctions against defendant and her attorney (the

Scroll to Top