Legal Opinion
In Re Marriage of Niklas
California Court of Appeal
Decided May 31, 1989No. B038981PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
GEORGE, J.
Elizabeth R. Niklas, the petitioner in a marital dissolution proceeding (hereinafter referred to as wife), and her attorney, Stuart B. Walzer, appeal from an order finding they failed to comply with court-ordered discovery and imposing monetary sanctions. They contend (1) a March 30, 1988, discovery order violated the attorney work-product doctrine and attorney-client privilege, and (2) the $45,000 sanctions imposed were excessive. For the reasons discussed below, we conclude the trial court’s order imposing discovery sanctions is not appealable but elect to treat the present…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- In re BerryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
- Rose v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977
- In Re MisenerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
- Lund v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1964
- Fairfield v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1966
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Zellerino v. BrownCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1991
- Ellis v. Toshiba America Information Systems., Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2013
- Wanke, Industrial, Commercial, Residential, Inc. v. KeckCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
- In Re Marriage of QuayCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1993
- Ellis v. Toshiba AmericaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.