Reiter v. Musaelian
Filed 6/30/06 Reiter v. Musaelian CA1/4
Received for posting 7/11/06
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION FOUR
| JOSEPH REITER, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ANDREW MUSAELIAN, Defendant; JOHN G. WARNER, Objector and Appellant. | A110100 (Sonoma County Super. Ct. No. SCV-222305) |
This case comes before us on appeal after the trial court awarded sanctions to plaintiff Joseph Reiter based on the conduct of defendant Andrew Musaelian and his attorney John G. Warner in three previous consolidated appeals, which were dismissed due to Musaelian's failure to file an opening brief.[1] We conclude the trial court acted without authority in awarding sanctions on appeal.
I. BACKGROUND
A. Proceedings in Trial Court
Reiter brought this action against Musaelian in August 1999, alleging causes of action for malicious prosecution, abuse of process, unauthorized practice of law, assault, battery, vehicular assault, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and negligence. The caption of the complaint named as defendants, inter alia, â€
