Evilsizor

Evilsizor v. Sweeney

Good Law
179 Cal. Rptr. 3d 400·2014 Cal. App. LEXIS 981·230 Cal. App. 4th 1304
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 28, 2014A140059California3,569 words

Opinion

Opinion

Humes, J.

Respondent Joseph Sweeney issued a subpoena for bank records in the course of divorce proceedings with his wife, Keri Evilsizor. The subpoena sought records from his wife’s accounts, but these records included financial information about her father. The father, appellant John Evilsizor, moved to quash the subpoena, and Sweeney responded by agreeing to amend the subpoena to exclude information about John’s account activities. John thereafter withdrew his motion to quash. But he did so belatedly, and the trial court sanctioned him by ordering him to pay a portion of the attorney fees Sweeney incurred in responding to the motion. On appeal, John argues that the court lacked a legal or factual basis for the award. We affirm and hold that a trial court may impose sanctions under Code of Civil Procedure section 1987.2 against a litigant for pursuing a motion to quash that, even though legitimately filed, was rendered unnecessary by a subsequent amendment or withdrawal of the subpoena.

I.

Factual and Procedural Background

The proceedings to dissolve Sweeney and Keri’s marriage began in April 2013. Judging by the register of actions, the litigation has been contentious, with…

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.