This appeal not only is unsuccessful but is frivolous. Mandir challenges the trial court’s decision for reasons, and on grounds, that are directly contrary to several fundamental principles governing appellate review. Although no party requested a statement of decision, and the trial did not issue one, Mandir ignores the doctrine of implied findings and instead attacks statements made by the trial court in rendering the statement of intended decision. Mandir mounts a substantial evidence challenge which, as we shall explain, violates virtually every precept of that standard of review. And despite making a substantial evidence challenge, and citing trial exhibits in its appellate opening brief, Mandir has not secured transmission of the trial exhibits to this court.
We grant the [] motion for monetary sanctions and award sanctions against Mandir’s counsel in the requested amount of $49,243.20.1.
Also of interest today: Committee Backs Off Sweeping Changes to Commission on Judicial Performance -- A panel charged with scrutinizing California's judicial disciplinary system said in report made public Monday that the state should not scrap a statute of limitations on disciplining judges but should instead extend the current six-year window to 15 years in many cases.
Posts
