Legal Opinion

20th Century Insurance v. Tak Hung Choong

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 17, 2000No. B123246PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

JOHNSON, J.

In this case we hold an attorney-employer has standing to appeal a monetary sanction imposed on an attorney-employee. We also hold imposing a monetary sanction for not paying a previous monetary sanction was not an abuse of discretion.

Facts and Proceedings Below

At a mandatory settlement conference, the trial court imposed a sanction in the amount of $200 on plaintiff’s attorney, Richard Collins, for failure to prepare a mandatory settlement conference statement. (Super. Ct. L.A. County, Local Rules, rule 7.9(b)(6).) The court’s order provided the sanction would be set aside…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. County of Alameda v. CarlesonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
  2. Moyal v. LanphearCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1989
  3. Caldwell v. Samuels JewelersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1990
  4. People v. TabbCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1991
  5. Calhoun v. Vallejo City Unified School DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1993

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Mardirossian & Associates, Inc. v. ErsoffCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
  2. Sampson v. Parking Service 2000 Com., Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2004
  3. Palm Valley Homeowners Ass'n v. Design MTCCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2000
  4. Franceschi v. Franchise Tax BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
  5. Jackson v. Chevron U.S.A. CA2/5California Court of Appeal · 2015

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API