CHOONG

20th Century Insurance v. Tak Hung Choong

Good Law
2000 Cal. App. LEXIS 288·2000 Daily Journal DAR 3993·79 Cal. App. 4th 1274·94 Cal. Rptr. 2d 753·2000 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2971
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 17, 2000B123246California1,211 words

Opinion

Opinion

Johnson, J.

In this case we hold an attorney-employer has standing to appeal a monetary sanction imposed on an attorney-employee. We also hold imposing a monetary sanction for not paying a previous monetary sanction was not an abuse of discretion.

Facts and Proceedings Below

At a mandatory settlement conference, the trial court imposed a sanction in the amount of $200 on plaintiff’s attorney, Richard Collins, for failure to prepare a mandatory settlement conference statement. (Super. Ct. L.A. County, Local Rules, rule 7.9(b)(6).) The court’s order provided the sanction would be set aside if the settlement conference statement was submitted by 4:30 p.m. that day. The settlement conference was continued to the following week. The minute order shows Collins was present when the sanction order was issued.

The continued settlement conference was called for hearing on the specified date with Collins again appearing for plaintiff. Collins conceded the $200 sanction had not been paid and told the court he did not know the sanction order was directed at him. The trial court rejected this excuse since Collins had been present when the sanction order was issued and the minute order clearly…

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.