Legal Opinion
London v. DRI-HONING CORP.
California Court of Appeal
Decided April 19, 2004No. C043096PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
DAVIS, J.
In this appeal, we conclude that a motion for discovery monetary sanctions may be made after an underlying motion to compel further response to an inspection demand is litigated. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031, subd. (m).) We will accordingly affirm the trial court’s order imposing over $6,000 in monetary sanctions. (See § 904.1, subd. (a)(12).)
Background
Plaintiff Morrie London (London) sued his former employer, Dri-Honing Corporation (Dri-Honing), and its president, Herman Kaiser, for wrongful termination, age and physical handicap discrimination, fraud, and other causes of action.
A…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- People v. WileyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
- Zellerino v. BrownCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1991
- Sherman v. Kinetic Concepts, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1998
- Vallbona v. SpringerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1996
- Kuhns v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1992
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- New Albertsons, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
- City of L.A. v. PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLCCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2022
- City of Los Angeles v. Pricewaterhousecoopers, LLPCalifornia Supreme Court · 2024
- Karton v. Ari Design & ConstructionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2021
- Karton v. Ari Design & Construction, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2021