This litigation started as an ordinary claim of breach of contract flowing from a business venture that went awry. We hopefully put this matter to rest. But we must opine on the duties of counsel as an officer of the court. We expect counsel to know and follow basic law relating to civil procedure. That did not happen here. We will impose sanctions for the filing of a frivolous appeal from a discretionary trial court ruling. We publish this opinion for several reasons, not the least of which is a guidepost to the bar not to file a frivolous appeal. We ourselves had occasion to warn attorneys concerning the abuse of discretion standard on appeal twenty-five years ago. (Estate of Gilkison (1998) 65 Cal.App.4th 1443 (Gilkison).) “‘Everything has been said already; but as no one listens, we must always begin again.’” (Overton v. Vita-Food Corp. (1949) 94 Cal.App.2d 367, 370.) We borrow the phrase from our previous opinion: This appeal “was ‘dead on arrival’ at the appellate courthouse.” (Gilkison, supra, at p. 1449.) This does not mean that we do not consider the contentions of counsel. We do. But sometimes, the contentions are frivolous in light of the record on appeal. That is the case here.
Appellant and his counsel, jointly and severally, are sanctioned in the amount of $10,000 payable to respondent, and in the amount of $5,000 payable to the clerk of this court.The MetNews article on this is Frivolous Appeal Sparks Order to Pay $15,000 in Sanctions -- C.A. Panel Says Opinion Is Ordered to Be Published As ‘Guidepost to the Bar’
Law360's article is Atty Hit With Sanctions Over 'Frivolous' Calif. Ruling Appeal
Posts
