Cases Under Review: Siry Decision, Which Created A Split In Appellate Thinking On A Fee Issue Under Penal Code Section 496(b), Is Accepted For Review By The California Supreme Court

Siry Departed From Opposite Conclusion Reached by the Fifth District in Switzer v. Wood.

            On March 4, 2020, we posted on Siry Investment v. Farkhondehpour, a 2/2 DCA published opinion concluding that a trial judge could not award treble damages and attorney’s fees under Penal Code section 496(c), parting company with the contrary conclusion by the Fifth District in Switzer v. Wood, 35 Cal.App.5^th 116 (2019).  We can now report an update.  On July 8, 2020, in a 7-0 vote, the California Supreme Court granted review of the case (assigning it Case No. S262081) and framing these issues as being presented for review:  (1) May a party in default file a motion for new trial raising legal error, including the inapplicability of certain remedies under the allegations as pleaded? (2) May a trial court may award treble damages and attorney fees under Penal Code section 496, subdivision (c), in a case involving the fraudulent diversion of business funds rather than trafficking in stolen goods?