Justice Baltodano's opinion earlier today says, in part:
"Father failed to appear for his court-ordered deposition. In response, the trial court sanctioned Father by prohibiting him from: (1) introducing evidence and testimony at trial, (2) cross-examining most witnesses, and (3) making objections on child custody and visitation issues. The only exception to these sanctions permitted Father to 'cross-examine medical professionals, representatives of Child Protective Services[,] and representatives of law enforcement agencies.' Father concedes these sanctions were 'imminently reasonable.'"
Since it's a family law case (and one in which the trial court found that Father repeatedly molested the kids), I can't find most of the briefs online. But since the parties were represented by counsel, I'm hoping that the concession was that these sanctions were "eminently" reasonable (rather than imminent).
But I could see someone making that mistake. In a brief or otherwise.
