Court Opinion

ID: 9750228
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-28 14:38:18.179151+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:26:04.795417
License: Public Domain

CROSBY, J., Concurring and Dissenting.
Dismissal of that portion of the appeal purporting to challenge the $315 sanctions award is, of course, correct. (Greene v. Amante (1992) 3 Cal.App.4th 684, 690-692 [4 Cal.Rptr.2d 571] (dis. opn. of Crosby, J.).) I vehemently disagree, however, with the majority’s dictum concerning aggregation of a series of minuscule discovery sanctions awards to reach what they characterize as a “$750 ‘bright line.’ ” (Maj. opn., ante, at p. 59.)
For the reasons expressed in my dissenting opinion in Greene, I also disagree with the decision to resolve the $1,500 discovery sanctions issue on the merits. (Greene v. Amante, supra, 3 Cal.App.4th 684, 690-692 (dis. opn. of Crosby, J.).) There is no presently appealable judgment; and it is just plain silly to shelve serious business in order to entertain a chorus of whining lawyers complaining of such awards, most of which would be small potatoes in small claims court.