What is a Motion for Contempt (CCP 1209)?

Useful Rulings on Motion for an OSC Re: Contempt (CCP 1209)

Recent Rulings on Motion for an OSC Re: Contempt (CCP 1209)

GUARDIANSHIP OF CADEN WALKER, ET AL.

Failure to file the accounting within the time specified under subdivision (a), or within 45 days of actual receipt of the notice, whichever is later, shall constitute a contempt of the authority of the court as described in Section 1209 of the Code of Civil Procedure. It is recommended the Court continue the hearing to November 2, 2002, and set the matter to show cause why an accounting is on file. The accounting must be filed 10 days before that hearing date in order to be considered.

  • Hearing

    Oct 05, 2020

  • Judge Jed Beebe
  • County

    Santa Barbara County, CA

KAIRI HARVIG VS VALERIO CHIAROTTI

Thereafter, Plaintiff alleges that she pursued the fraudulent credit charges by and through a contempt proceeding in Plaintiff and Defendant’s underlying divorce action (Case No. BD621055), resulting in a plea of no contest by Defendant, a fine of $1,000.00 and 16 hours of community service. Plaintiff filed the instant action on November 28, 2018 and a First Amended Complaint on June 25, 2020, alleging four (4) causes of action sounding in (1) Conversion; and (2) Violation of Pen.

  • Hearing

    Oct 02, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL FLAHERTY VS BRITTANY JEAN OWEN

Nature of Proceedings: Order to Show Cause: Contempt Setting This matter is on calendar for Contempt setting. Appearance required.

  • Hearing

    Oct 01, 2020

EDWARD VS. DANA POINT TAXPAYERS ASSOCIATION

. , which exposes any person to hatred, contempt, ridicule, or obloquy, or which causes him to be shunned or avoided, or which has a tendency to injure him in his occupation. (Civ. Code § 45.) Further, libel per se “is defamatory of the plaintiff without necessity of explanatory matter, such as an inducement, innuendo or other extrinsic fact.”

  • Hearing

    Oct 01, 2020

CALIFORNIA STATE LABOR COMMISSIONER, DIVISION OF LABOR STANDARDS ENFORCEMENT, DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, STATE OF CA VS GRAPHIC RESEARCH INC.

A failure to comply with the order by Respondent may lead to the setting to a contempt of court hearing. Petitioner to give notice.

  • Hearing

    Sep 30, 2020

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

JANE DOE VS HONGMIN ZHAO, ET AL.

to Defendants, in the amount of $3,187.50 to initiate contempt proceedings.

  • Hearing

    Sep 30, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Discrimination/Harass

ARTHUR YAZICHYAN VS MERCEDES BENZ USA LLC

A person found guilty of contempt is subject to fine (up to $1,000) or imprisonment (up to 5 days), or both. (CCP § 1218; see People v. Gonzalez (1996) 12 Cal.4th 804, 816.) A court could also impose civil contempt sanctions of imprisonment until the party complies. (Ibid.) In addition, a party to the action who is adjudged guilty of contempt may be ordered to pay the opposing party's reasonable attorney fees in connection with the contempt proceedings. (CCP § 1218(a).)

  • Hearing

    Sep 30, 2020

NEWCASTLE MANOR HOMEOWNERS ASSOC. VS JOEL OSTROFF

Time is billed for communicating with the Plaintiff and Defendant’s attorney, reviewing health department inspections, drafting this motion, the motion to amend judgment, the ex parte application, and order to show cause regarding Defendant’s contempt, and appearing for the contempt hearing. Plaintiff was also billed for the costs of electronic filing, shipping and service charges, mileage, parking, and postage.

  • Hearing

    Sep 29, 2020

IN THE MATTER OF THE LEWIS FAMILY TRUST

Application for Order to Show Cause for Indirect Contempt for Violation of Court Order [Code Civ. Proc. § 1212, Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1201] PREGRANT ORDER The courtroom will be open on September 29, 2020. However, because of emergency orders and public health directives due to the COVID-19 pandemic, neither counsel nor petitioner need appear in person. Counsel for petitioner will receive an invitation to attend court remotely via Zoom, and is encouraged to accept that invitation.

  • Hearing

    Sep 29, 2020

LUIS RODRIGUEZ VS. SECRET RECIPES, INC.

He states that a majority of the hours billed in these proceedings were spent in preparing and seeking to enforce Plaintiff’s post-judgment SROGs and RPDs, defending against Defendant’s successive and unsuccessful motions to vacate the judgment, conducting 2 judgment debtor examinations, and ex parte applications for an OSC re contempt. (Id., ¶21.) · Mr.

  • Hearing

    Sep 25, 2020

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

STEINER V. CEDILLO

settled the cases with an agreement that includes the following terms: the terms of the settlement applied to all three cases; certain provisions of restraint shall be imposed on defendant/respondent; the previous restraining orders imposed in Alameda County Superior Court case number RG20056319 shall be retained until June 5, 2025; the court is requested to approve the stipulation and order the parties to comply with it; violation of the order may result in imposition of a monetary penalty and a finding of contempt

  • Hearing

    Sep 25, 2020

LAKELAND WEST CAPITAL VIII, LLC VS WILLIAM F. LASKY

(d) The order shall be personally served upon the judgment debtor and shall contain a notice to the judgment debtor that failure to comply with the order may subject the judgment debtor to being held in contempt of court.” Here, a noticed motion has been made, and the court had previously noted that both such orders require a “showing of need for the order.”

  • Hearing

    Sep 25, 2020

FINANCIAL PACIFIC LEASING, INC. VS. DANIEL CUMMINS

Failure to turn over possession of such property to plaintiff may subject the defendants to being held in contempt of court. (CCP § 512.070)

  • Hearing

    Sep 24, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

DICKINSON V. LEASON

Independent Matter This is a motion to enforce a settlement but enmeshed in the papers is a secondary request, which seeks to “enforce” or start“contempt” proceedings regarding an earlier pretrial order in the case, a July 11, 2019 order, in which the plaintiff was awarded compensatory legal fees and costs in connection with the setting aside of Defendant’s default. The legal fees are said to be unpaid, on the part of the defense counsel.

  • Hearing

    Sep 24, 2020

WADE ROBSON VS DOE 1, ET AL

The OSCs re contempt are MOOT/DENIED as to Spence and Fox. Sanctions re Fox and Spence motions Fox and Spence separately seek sanctions against Plaintiff and/or counsel in the amount of $5,135.00 pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2025.420(h) for opposing the motion without substantial justification.

  • Hearing

    Sep 24, 2020

WIMBERLEY VS CITY OF SAN DIEGO

They include monetary sanctions, contempt sanctions, issue sanctions ordering that designated facts be taken as established or precluding the offending party from supporting or opposing designated claims or defenses, evidence sanctions prohibiting the offending party from introducing designated matters into evidence, and terminating sanctions that include striking part or all of the pleadings, dismissing part or all of the action, or granting a default judgment against the offending party.

  • Hearing

    Sep 24, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

POINSETTIA VS CHEN

Valley View State Bank (1994) 25 Cal.App.4th 734, 741 [the failure to comply with the statutory scheme requiring a bond is a jurisdictional defect which precludes a court from holding noncompliant party subject to injunction in contempt].) Background: Verified Complaint filed on 6/18/20 for (1) breach of contract (governing documents) and enforcement of monetary penalties, and (2) injunctive relief.

  • Hearing

    Sep 23, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

ANN MARIE STREIBICH VS MARK SHINNICK

Legal Standard Where a party engages in misuse of discovery process, the court may impose monetary, issue, evidence, terminating, or contempt sanctions. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.030.)

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

ML DOE V. DOE 1, A CORP.

Motion No. 1: Based on the Notice of Withdrawal of Plaintiff John ML Does’ Motion for an Order to Show Cause Re: Contempt Against Steven Budman (filed on 9-2-20 under ROA No. 174), Plaintiff’s Motion for an Order to Show Cause Re: Contempt Against Steven Budman (filed on 2-11-20 under ROA No. 83, and scheduled for hearing on 9-22-20) is off calendar.

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

RYAN HARPER VS DAVID ZISLIS

Standard: Code of Civil Procedure section 1008(d) states that “[a] violation of this section maybe punished as a contempt and with sanctions as allowed by Section 128.7.”

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

MIDLAND ENTERTAINMENT LLC VS HYDRA GROUP LLC ET AL

Casiano Bel-Air Homeowners Assn. (1989) 215 Cal.App.3d 515, which held that an attorney fee provision allowing fees “[i]n any legal or equitable proceeding for the enforcement or to restrain the violation of these restrictions or any provisions hereof,” allowed for the recovery of fees in civil contempt proceedings to enforce the provisions. (Id. at pp. 522–23.)

  • Hearing

    Sep 21, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

THE MOTIVA GROUP INC VS GLOBAL IMPACT GROUP INC

The OSC (ROA # 369, 386, 388, 389, 408, 410, 412, 475, 476, 481, 500, 502, 518, 520) re contempt of Court of Defendants Michael Holleran and National Small Business Alliance ("Defendants") for disobeying the Court's Order Appointing Receiver Over National Small Business Alliance ("NSBA") entered on November 22, 2019 ("Order Appointing Receiver") is, on the Court's own motion, CONTINUED to Tuesday October 27, 2020 at 9:00 am in D 73.

  • Hearing

    Sep 21, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

DANIEL HASSO VS YIOLA AWABDY

If anyone engages in conduct that is a misuse of the discovery process, the court may impose monetary sanction, issue sanction, evidence sanction, terminating sanction, and contempt sanction. (CCP § 2023.030.) “[T]here are effective… remedies for spoliation of evidence, including the evidentiary inference that evidence destroyed by a party is unfavorable to that party (Evid. Code, § 413), the potent sanctions for abuse of discovery (Code Civ.

  • Hearing

    Sep 21, 2020

CESAR ROMERO ET AL VS BROCCA CUSTOM FINISHING CARPENTRY INC

DISCUSSION Contempt of the authority of a court includes the act of “[d]isobedience of any lawful judgment, order, or process of the court.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 1209(a)(5).) “[U]nlawful interference with the process or proceedings of a court” is also a contemptable action. (Code Civ. Proc. § 1209(a)(9).) When contempt is committed outside of the view and presence of the court “an affidavit shall be presented to the court or judge of the facts constituting the contempt.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 1211(a).)

  • Hearing

    Sep 21, 2020

THE MOTIVA GROUP INC VS GLOBAL IMPACT GROUP INC

Demurrer / Motion to Dismiss Contempt Count The Demurrer and Motion to dismiss the contempt count is overruled and denied. Paragraph 13 of the November 22, 2019 order (ROA # 355) appointing a receiver states: "13.

  • Hearing

    Sep 18, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 152     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we load this page.