J.N. v. Goldberg

Summary

The California Court of Appeal reverses an order imposing Code of Civil Procedure section 128.7 sanctions and the resulting judgment. The court holds that the sanctions notice was fatally defective because it did not state the hearing date as required by sections 128.7 and 1010, and that the 21-day safe harbor period therefore never began. The case is remanded for further proceedings.

Holdings

1. A notice of motion seeking sanctions under section 128.7 must state when the motion will be heard because section 128.7 incorporates the notice requirements of section 1010, which requires a notice of motion to state when it will be made.
2. The superior court's electronic case-reservation system did not excuse compliance with the statutory notice and safe-harbor requirements and could not create an exception to sections 128.7 and 1010.
3. The failure to comply with section 128.7's notice and safe-harbor requirements required reversal of the sanctions order and corresponding judgment; the defect could not be cured by plaintiffs' opportunity to litigate the merits or by harmless-error principles.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a notice of motion for sanctions under California Code of Civil Procedure section 128.7 must specify when the motion will be heard.
2. Whether the superior court's electronic motion-reservation system excused defendant's failure to comply with the statutory notice and 21-day safe-harbor requirements.
3. Whether the defective notice could be salvaged under statutory-impossibility or harmless-error principles.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded