Bauguess v. Paine

I dissent.

The majority purport to hold—without confronting the issue—that an order imposing sanctions on an attorney for misconduct resulting in mistrial of an action in which he appears only in a representative capacity, is an appealable order in that action.

In support of such proposition the majority state the rule that a final. order on a collateral matter directing payment of money is appealable, citing Wisniewski v. Clary (1975) 46 Cal.App.3d 499 [120 Cal.Rptr. 176], (Ante, p. 634, fn. 3.) However, Wisniewski stands only for the proposition that such an order is appealable by an…