Once a familiar expression, the "curate's egg" meant an egg that would not be rejected because it was good (unspoiled) in parts -- curates being perhaps seen as desperate enough to accept such a thing. The phrase also describes many lawsuits, which are not meritless in their entirety but include some meritless elements. According to the Civil Justice Association of California, section 128.5 of the state's Code of Civil Procedure currently allows judges to impose sanctions only if an entire lawsuit is without merit -- and since many of the suits in question are curates' eggs, good in part, targets are left with no effective remedy for their (perhaps predominant) baseless elements. Hence the introduction of Assembly Bill 1891 (Niello), which allows judges more latitude to impose sanctions for partially baseless actions. Cal Law's Legal Pad gives the measure little chance in the Democratic-dominated Assembly -- and yet, according to a legislative calendar, it is getting a hearing today.
California's AB 1891 and the curate's egg
- Bad typography evidence of bad faith?
- Court rejects appeal bond in Cobell v. Salazar
- Judge orders lawyers to mandatory Labor-Day weekend seminar
- "Asbestos defendant seeks $1M in legal fees in fraud case"
- Around the web, October 28
- Around the web, October 15
- Around the web, October 7
- Around the web, August 27
- California class actions
- California wildfires
- $96m Smokeless Tobacco Cases class action settlement
- California bill on collateral-source rule
- Countersue? Just try it, doc
Center for Legal Policy at the