Legal Opinion
Do v. Superior Court
California Court of Appeal
Decided June 18, 2003No. G031415PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
RYLAARSDAM, J.
Steven P. Rice is the attorney for petitioner Christie Julie Do, the defendant in the trial court. Because Do is indigent, Rice is *1212representing her free of charge. Petitioner seeks relief from an order denying her request for monetary discovery sanctions. Even though plaintiff, real party in interest Quang Thanh Nguyen, twice failed to appear for noticed depositions, the court denied the request, concluding it had no power to order sanctions in favor of a party represented by a lawyer acting without charge. We disagree with this conclusion and therefore issue a writ of…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Ketchum v. MosesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2001
- PLCM Group, Inc. v. DrexlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 2000
- Trope v. KatzCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995
- Lolley v. CampbellCalifornia Supreme Court · 2002
- Caryl Richards, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Whaley v. Sony Computer Entertainment America, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2004
- Glaviano v. Sacramento City Unified Sch. Dist., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
- Lori A. Saxon . Todd D. Zirkle and Jane Khoury and Olivia BakerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2014
- Moran v. Oso Valley Greenbelt Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004
- DO v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2003
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.