What is the test for appeal against a sanction order under section 271 for abuse of discretion?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Katz v. Katz (In re Katz), B245702 (Cal. App. 2015):
We review a sanction order under section 271 for abuse of discretion. (In re Marriage of Sorge (2012) 202 Cal.App.4th 626, 652.) We indulge all reasonable inferences to uphold the court's order which will be reversed only if, considering all the evidence viewed most favorably in support of its order, no judge reasonably could have made such an order. (Id. at pp. 652-653.) The burden is on the complaining party to establish abuse of discretion. (Blank v. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal.3d 311, 331.) The showing on appeal is insufficient if it presents a state of facts which does nothing more than afford an opportunity for a difference of opinion. (In re Marriage of Varner (1997) 55 Cal.App.4th 128, 138; In re Marriage of Rosevear (1998) 65 Cal.App.4th 673, 682.)
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
