This opinon seems entirely correct. As far as it goes.
Jeffrey Golin and Elise Golin are surely vexatious litigants. Of that there can be little doubt. But defendants didn't show that their claims had no reasonable probability of success. So the trial court's imposition of a half-million dollar bond requirement gets reversed. Makes sense.
But I wonder if the Court of Appeal might have done a little more. For example, among their other frivolous acts, the Court of Appeal notes that it's pretty clear that the Golins forged various proofs of service. What about referring the matter to the District Attorney? Moreover, the Golins also apparently ghost-wrote a large number of their attorney's filings in the trial court, and the Court of Appeal found that the attorney had little to no control over what was failed. How about referring that attorney to the relevant Bar?
None of this is required, of course. But I'm left with the impression that, to a degree, the Golins have "gotten away" with making the case a nightmare for the defendants below. Which don't seem right.
