Chen

Chen v. JP Morgan Chase Bank CA2/2

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 2, 2015B255577California472 words

Opinion

Opinion

DISCUSSION

In her opening brief, Chen argues that the FAC is legally sufficient. But all we have before us is the trial court’s dismissal order under section 68608, subdivision (b).

The Local Rules of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County were revised and reorganized effective January 1, 2015, and this is now rule 3.25. The local rules cited in this opinion are the former local rules applicable at the time of the events in this case.

All further statutory references are to the Government Code unless otherwise indicated.

2 We review such orders for an abuse of discretion. (California Casualty Indemnity Ins. Co. v. Mendoza (1995) 36 Cal.App.4th 678, 680-682 (Mendoza).) The trial court’s order was well within its discretion. Enacted as part of the Trial Court Delay Reduction Act (§ 68600 et seq.), section 68608, subdivision (b) empowers judges “to impose sanctions authorized by law, including the power to dismiss actions or strike pleadings, if it appears that less severe sanctions would not be effective after taking into account the effect of previous sanctions or previous lack of compliance in the case. Judges are encouraged to impose sanctions to achieve the…

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.