Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)

Citation
Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
Parent Document
Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
Jurisdiction
California (state)
Effective Date
2017-10-05

Other Sections in This Document (61)

Full Text

795 chars
A number of cases have held that noncompliance with a court order to disclose financial condition precludes a defendant from challenging the sufficiency of the evidence of a punitive damages award on appeal. (See Corenbaum v. Lampkin (2013) 215 Cal.App.4th 1308, 1337-1338, 156 Cal.Rptr.3d 347 ; StreetScenes v. ITC Entertainment Group, Inc . (2002) 103 Cal.App.4th 233, 243-244, 126 Cal.Rptr.2d 754 ; Mike Davidov Co. v. Issod (2000) 78 Cal.App.4th 597, 600, 606-610, 92 Cal.Rptr.2d 897 ; see also Caira v. Offner (2005) 126 Cal.App.4th 12, 40-41, 24 Cal.Rptr.3d 233 ; In re Marriage of Hofer (2012) 208 Cal.App.4th 454, 458-459, 145 Cal.Rptr.3d 697.) Rawat makes no effort to explain why these authorities do not apply herein. We find they do, and reject her claim of error. II Appeal of Singh