Sanctions: February 2017 Report By California Research Bureau On CCP § 128.5 and 128.7 Sanctions Motions Show They Are Not Filed In Very Many Cases

Report Also Shows That Reporting Attorneys Did Not Provide The “End Conclusions” To The Sanctions Requests.

            In February 2017, the California Research Bureau issued a mandatory report for 2015-2016 relating to the use of CCP § 128.5 motions (whether alone or combined with CCP § 128.7 motions) as required under section 128.5. Although attorneys are under a requirement to report to the California Research Bureau, its results show that even reporting attorneys do not provide the actual order on the 128.5 proceeding in 64.4% of matters for which initial motion submissions were made. However, we do give you a flavor for the conclusions reached by the Bureau:

  • 128.5 requests, whether single or combined with 128.7 requests, totaled only .05% of all civil filings for 2015-2016;
  • 129 sanctions motions were made during 2015-2016, as reported;
  • Of those reported motions, 11.6% were granted, 24% were denied, and 64.4% of the motions never resulted in reporting the results on the sanctions requests;
  • The county leaders as far as numbers of sanctions requests were, in order: Los Angeles; Orange; San Francisco; San Diego; Santa Clara;
  • If one takes away the nonreporting anomaly, one-third of the frivolous action requests were granted (15 of 46), with 6 of 15 awarded for full attorney’s fees requests and with the average award being $8,833; and
  • When one boils down both the Bureau and Judicial Council statistics, less than one-half of 1% of civil cases filings involved 128.5 requests (singular or combined with 128.7 requests).
Scroll to Top