Hufnagel

Del Junco v. Hufnagel

Good Law
150 Cal. App. 4th 789·60 Cal. Rptr. 3d 22
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 31, 2007B191456California3,775 words

Opinion

Opinion

Aldrich, J.

I.

INTRODUCTION

Defendant and appellant V. Georges Hufnagel created a Web site that looked like the Web site of plaintiff and respondent Tirso Del Junco, Jr., M.D. Hufnagel’s Web site libeled Dr. Del Junco. Hufnagel appeals from the default judgment entered in favor of Dr. Del Junco. We find unpersuasive all contentions raised by Hufnagel except for the argument that the punitive damage award cannot stand.

In the published portions of this opinion (pts. I., II., DI.A., III.E., & IV.), we hold that Hufnagel’s counterfeit Web site contained defamatory statements and the trial court had the jurisdiction to strike Hufnagel’s answer and enter default.

We reverse the judgment with regard to the punitive damages because there was no proof of Hufnagel’s financial condition. In all other respects the judgment is affirmed. We remand the matter to the trial court with directions to-modify the judgment by striking the punitive damages.

II.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

A. Facts.

Dr. Del Junco was a trained general and vascular surgeon licensed in California. As part of his general surgery residency, Dr. Del Junco received rotations in female or gynecological surgery,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.