California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Kleveland v. Siegel & Wolensky, LLP, 155 Cal.Rptr.3d 599, 215 Cal.App.4th 534 (Cal. App. 2013):
For example, the trial court in the trust litigation specifically found that the petition for breach of trust and removal was filed and pursued in bad faith and for an improper motive. Yet, nowhere in Attorney Defendants' opening brief do they mention this finding. This is all the more preposterous because this finding of bad faith was appealed and affirmed by this court. (See Leach v. Kleveland, supra, D054532.) Attorney Defendants only offer selective facts from the record that essentially ignore the findings in the trust litigation and ask this court to consider evidence that was explicitly rejected by the trial court. They offer no authority that permits this approach. They appear merely to pretend the results of the trust litigation were something they clearly were not. Attorney Defendants attempt to reargue factual issues that have long been decided (and affirmed on appeal) while ignoring the relevant statutes and case law. At times, it is clear that Attorney Defendants brazenly misrepresented the record and/or obscured facts.
[215 Cal.App.4th 558]
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.