California Court of Appeal

Reset A A Font size: Print

Wallis v. PHL Assoc., Inc., C056200

Imposition of $43,67.42 of sanctions against plaintiffs-attorney and her clients is affirmed where: 1) plaintiffs' contentions alleging abuse of discretion by the trial court were without merit; 2) plaintiffs' position, that the appearance of the declaration in the court's public file allowed them to disclose the information attached to the declaration, was frivolous; and 3) plaintiffs acted in bad faith when they disclosed the information.

Appellate Information

  • Decided 11/25/2008
  • Published 11/25/2008

Judges

  • NICHOLSON, J.

Court

  • California Court of Appeal

Counsel

  • For Appellees:
  • Mennemeier, Glassman & Stroud, Andrew W. Stroud, Sacramento, and Kelcie M. Gosling for Plaintiff, Cross-defendants and Appellants., Downey Brand, William R. Warne, and Tory E. Griffin Sacramento, for Defendant, Cross-complainant, and Respondent PHL Associates, Inc., Klaus J. Kolb for Defendants, Cross-complainants, and Respondents Jeffrey T. Wichmann and Mary B. Holmes.
Copied to clipboard