Legal Opinion
Caldwell v. Samuels Jewelers
California Court of Appeal
Decided August 2, 1990No. H005409PublishedCited by 30 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
COTTLE, J.
In separate appeals, plaintiff’s attorney, James K. Roberts, and defendants’ attorneys, Margaret Pendergast and Stephen Whitmore of—the law firm of Bley and Bley (hereafter collectively Bley), seek reversal of a trial court order imposing monetary sanctions on them pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 177.5 1 and California Rules of Court, rule 227 2 for disobeying an earlier court order. The attorneys contend the order is invalid because (1) the notice requirements of due process and section 177.5 were not met; (2) the evidence was insufficient to justify sanctions;…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- In Re Marriage of FlahertyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1982
- Bauguess v. PaineCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
- Ellis v. Roshei Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1983
- Lavine v. Hospital of the Good SamaritanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1985
- O'BRIEN v. CsehCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1983
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by30 opinions
- Interinsurance Exchange of the Automobile Club v. CollinsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994
- Mardirossian & Associates, Inc. v. ErsoffCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
- Childs v. PAINE WEBBER INCORPORATEDCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994
- Trans-Action Commercial Investors, Ltd. v. Firmaterr, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1997
- People v. TabbCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1991
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.