Sanctions and Vexatious Litigant Issues Not Foreclosed By A Settlement Or Dismissal Via Settlement/Judgment.
In Marriage of Patel and Bhatia, Case No. B307926 (2d Dist., Div. 3 Dec. 14, 2021) (unpublished), an ex-husband was sanctioned for $5,000 under Family Code section 271 [designed to penalize litigants not trying to settle or multiplying proceedings in a dissolution case] and declared to be a vexatious litigant. Ex-husband had reached a stipulated judgment with ex-wife, with nothing mentioning the pending sanctions/vexatious litigant motions. He appealed, arguing that the stipulated judgment/settlement deprived the lower court of ability to rule on the other pending requests, including the 271 sanctions motion. The 2/3 DCA disagreed. Adopting analogous reasoning from Pittman v. Beck Park Apartments Ltd., 20 Cal.App.5th 1009 (2d Dist., Div. 7 2018), the appellate court determined that these post-dismissal issues could be entertained by the lower court, including the sanctions order.
BLOB OBSERVATION—We now observe that a different division of the Second District has now endorsed the reasoning in Pittman. We will note that the First District, Division 3, did so, earlier this year, in a published decision. (Manhan v. Gallagher, 62 Cal.App.5th 504, 510 (2021) [reviewed in our March 29, 2021 post].)
Comments