Legal Opinion
Huschke v. Slater
California Court of Appeal
Decided December 2, 2008No. A117114PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
THE COURT. *
Appellant has moved to dismiss this appeal on the ground that the dispute between the parties was resolved by a settlement agreement. We shall grant the unopposed request.
The remaining issue is whether counsel’s lengthy delay in notifying the court of the settlement, in violation of rule 8.244 of the California Rules of Court, warrants imposition of monetary sanctions. The rules of court authorize the imposition of sanctions on a party or an attorney not only for the filing of a frivolous appeal or motion or for including in the record matters not reasonably material to the…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- In Re Marriage of FlahertyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1982
- Finnie v. Town of TiburonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1988
- DeGarmo v. GoldmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- Pierotti v. TorianCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2000
- Young v. RosenthalCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1989
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Foust v. San Jose Construction Co.California Court of Appeal · 2011
- Kim v. Westmoore Partners, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2011
- Jackpot Harvesting, Inc. v. Applied Underwriters, Inc., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2019
- Allee v. Super Ct. CA4/2California Court of Appeal · 2021
- Hayden v. Wells Fargo Bank CA4/2California Court of Appeal · 2014
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.