Elias
Elias v. Jensen CA4/3
Opinion
Opinion
Delaney, J.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND1
The underpinning of this case is a probate matter. At some point during the trial court proceedings, respondents filed a motion to have appellant declared a vexatious litigant. The court denied the motion but noted that appellant’s “‘conduct certainly [gave] the court pause and concern, suggesting a pattern of conduct that . . . if continued would rise to the level of being “vexatious.’”” It further “‘strongly cautioned’” appellant that “‘his conduct in [the] proceeding may be cited in any future motion to declare him [a] vexatious [litigant].’” Following numerous additional filings, a trial on certain matters, and multiple appeals by appellant, respondents once again filed a motion requesting that appellant be declared a vexatious litigant. Appellant opposed the motion arguing, inter alia, respondents were using it as a diversionary tactic to avoid certain alleged trust obligations. The trial court held an initial hearing and thereafter allowed the parties to submit supplemental briefing concerning whether certain identified filings by appellant qualified as “‘“unmeritorious motions, pleadings, or other papers, . . . [or] other tactics that are…