City of Inglewood v. Inglewood Neighborhood Hous. Services
Leo James Terrell (Terrell) and Inglewood Neighborhood Housing Services, Inc. (INHS) (collectively appellants) appeal from a ruling dated October 13, 2011, imposing monetary sanctions in the total amount of $16,175 against appellants for discovery violations.[1] Terrell also challenges the trial court’s denial of his motion for reconsideration of the sanctions order. We find no abuse of discretion in the trial court’s rulings, therefore we affirm.
CONTENTIONS
Terrell argues that there is no evidence that he had any part in INHS’s disobedience of the trial court’s orders or that he willfully advised INHS not to comply with the trial court’s orders. Specifically, Terrell claims there was a breakdown in the attorney-client relationship between himself and INHS such that he was unable to obtain INHS’s cooperation.
INHS argues that it had no knowledge of the trial court’s orders due to the breakdown of the attorney-client relationship. INHS also argues that the record shows by way of an absence of evidence that INHS had no knowledge of the orders of the court and that upholding the trial court’s order of $16,175 of sanctions against INHS is unjust and unfair as it effectively punishes the client when the client has no knowledge of the orders of the court.
Comments on City of Inglewood v. Inglewood Neighborhood Hous. Services