Court Of Appeal Observed That Cross-Defendant’s Frivolous Motion To Quash Was Sanctionable, But Remanded So The Technicality Could Be Cured.
Do not think that you can make factual misstatements or concealments in a motion to quash for lack of personal service; both trial and appellate courts will find this behavior sanctionable.
That is what happened in Rodrigo v. Truxas Sales, Inc., Case No. G061979 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Jan. 24, 2024) (unpublished). Cross-defendant brought a motion to quash and send the case from California to Texas, but scrubbed its Website of information showing it had California locations and then misrepresented that the dump truck was picked in Texas even though it actually was delivered in California. The lower court found that the motion to quash was factually frivolous and awarded sanctions of $9,000 to cross-complainant under CCP § 128.7.
The appellate court found the conduct sanctionable, too, but it remanded because the lower court failed to explain the sanctionable conduct with specificity—even though the appellate panel did indicate it likely knew what the conduct was. Acting Presiding Justice Sanchez penned the 3-0 unpublished opinion.
Comments