P1488 REVIEW DENIED The Court of Appeal affirmed imposition of sanctions exceeding $43,000 imposed on a party and its attorney for violating a protective order that prohibited disclosure of alleged trade secrets submitted under seal by arranging to have third parties view material alleged to be a trade secret that had been submitted under seal but somehow ended up in the unsealed portion of the record; sanctions for violating the order were appropriate regardless of whether the information was eventually determined to be a trade secret.CitationWALLIS v PHL (Sanctioned Disclosure) 168 CA4 882 [See: CCP 128.5; Olmstead v Gallagher 32 C4 804, P/AT 5/04]
|
|