Palm Valley Homeowners Ass'n v. Design MTC

Good Law
102 Cal. Rptr. 2d 350·2000 Cal. App. LEXIS 948·2000 Daily Journal DAR 13371·85 Cal. App. 4th 553·2000 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 10006
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 15, 2000E025519California3,452 words

Opinion

Opinion

Ward, J.

Appellant law firm Edwards, Sooy & Byron (the firm) appeals after the trial court imposed sanctions upon it for asserted bad faith acts and discovery abuses in the underlying construction defect litigation. The basis for the imposition of sanctions was that the firm pursued litigation activities on behalf of its client, even after the firm knew that the client was a suspended corporation.

The firm contends that the trial court abused its discretion in imposing sanctions: The rule is clear that a corporation suspended for nonpayment of taxes may not defend itself in litigation. The firm’s client, however, was suspended for failure to file a required information statement with the Secretary of State, and not for nonpayment of taxes. Whether these two types of corporate suspensions both result in a disqualification from litigation appears to be a question of first impression.

We conclude that, although the statutory provisions suspending a corporation for failure to file a required statement have not yet been so construed in any published California case, those provisions would make clear to any reasonable attorney that a corporation suspended under the Corporations Code,…

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.