Keitel v. Heubel (2002)

MARY C. KEITEL, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. GEORGE W. HEUBEL et al., Defendants and Appellants.

[Modification fn. * of opinion (98 Cal.App.4th 678) on denial of petition for rehearing.]

THE COURT.-

It is ordered that the opinion filed herein on May 21, 2002, be modified in the following particulars:

The text contained in footnote 2 on page 4 [98 Cal. App. 4th 684, advance report, fn. 2]is deleted. The deleted text is replaced with the following language:

"On July 30, 2001, Keitel filed a motion to impose sanctions for the filing of a frivolous appeal; she supplemented this motion on December 28, 2001. As a general rule, the issue of sanctions is argued at oral argument. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 26(e).) However, notwithstanding Keitel's pending motion, the Heubels waived oral argument on their appeal, and we did not order a hearing on Keitel's motion for frivolous appeal sanctions. However, at the March 14, 2002, hearing, the Heubels' appellate counsel accepted our express invitation to discuss the issue of sanctions for filing a frivolous appeal. At that hearing, this court advised counsel that we considered this appeal to be frivolous, and that issue was thoroughly discussed. The Heubels' counsel also discussed this issue in his written response to our May 7, 2002, notice. At no time prior to his petition for rehearing did counsel request an additional hearing on the issue of frivolous appeal sanctions. In light of these facts, we have concluded that scheduling an additional hearing would serve no useful purpose and would be inappropriate in light of the substantial time and expense already generated by these proceedings."

This modification does not effect a change in the judgment.

The petitions for rehearing filed by the Heubels and Daniel Bacon are denied.

FN *. This modification requires the movement of text affecting pages 684-691 of the bound volume report.