Wondering what happened in the Albinali v. Calvert case? The U.S. Federal Court System is one of the most complicated in the world. Plaintiffs, defendants, and their representations are required to follow strict court procedures. Every part of the system, including legal transcription companies, has its role to play, and missing any part of the process can have dire consequences. One wrong move increases the chances of sinking a case. Several wrong moves, meanwhile, will ensure that your case will be a faithful re-enactment of the last 30 minutes of Titanic.
Albinali v. Calvert is a decade-long debacle between a plastic surgeon and his former patient. While the case is complicated in its own right, missing a significant documentary requirement in the appeals process ensured that one of the parties missed out on a $75,000 payout—and was slapped with a $22,900 fine plus legal costs instead.
This is a tale of missed deadlines, an endless revolving door of lawyers, a blithe disregard for court orders—and missing transcripts.
In this article, you’ll learn how:
- In complex cases, even minor procedural mistakes, like missing document requirements, can lead to significant penalties, as seen in Albinali v. Calvert. In this case, failing to meet court demands cost one party $75,000 and imposed additional fines.
- Attempting to delay court proceedings with tactics such as frequently changing counsel, missing deadlines, or failing to provide necessary documentation often results in severe penalties and dismissal of claims.
- Reliable legal transcription is vital, particularly in appellate cases where providing detailed, accurate transcripts can support or refute key claims. Legal transcription companies like Ditto Transcripts ensure that certified, court-ready documents are available, helping litigants avoid dismissal due to inadequate documentation and supporting a stronger defense in appeals.
Round One: Calvert v. Albinali
In 2011, plastic surgeon Dr. Jay W. Calvert, based in California, filed a defamation suit against his former patient Rima Albinali, alleging that “she was responsible for a negative review posted online by one of his former patients.”
Unfortunately, Calvert had trouble serving Albinali—several attempts, including sending regular and first-class mail to the patient’s Laguna Beach and P.O. box, failed, and attempts to contact the defendant over the phone met similar results.
After many attempts, the Court finally permitted Calvert to serve Albinali via publication in the Laguna News-Post starting July 2012. After roughly two years with no response from the defendant, the court entered a default judgment, awarding $1.9 million in damages and litigation costs in favor of Calvert and against Albinali.
It is unclear when Calvery learned that Albinali was in Canada, but when the judgment was finalized, he applied to enforce it in Canadian jurisdiction. This time, Albinali got the message and lawyered up to fight the claim. Her defense revolved around due diligence, insisting that Calvert didn’t do enough to notify and serve her the lawsuit—and, by extension, denied her the chance of defense—and that he should have published in the Orange County Register, a bigger newspaper with significantly higher circulation.
It was enough for the Canadian court. After appealing the first judgment in favor of Calvert, the court awarded a motion to vacate in 2018, voiding the initial $1.9 million award in his favor. Meanwhile, Albinali was awarded approximately $75,000 for legal and attorney fees.
Albinali then attempted what Calvert did and applied to have the legal decision enforced in California.
Round Two: Albinali v. Calvert
Albinali filed in California in 2021 to collect her $75,000 payout. Unlike her, Calvert responded promptly, initiating an informal written discovery and taking Albinali’s deposition on July 20, 2022, facilitated online via webcall. However, the deposition was cut short due to technical difficulties, and here we see the first inklings of trouble.
While scheduling a follow-up deposition, Albinali’s counsel substituted out of the case, leaving her to represent herself. Calvert’s lawyer tried to reach her to set a date but was unsuccessful.
Leaving him no choice, Calvert filed a motion to compel Albinali to appear for the deposition on September 2022, along with a $3,000 sanction. Two days before the motion hearing, Albinali found another lawyer and requested more time to bring her new counsel up to speed. The court said yes, and on November 7, 2022, it compelled Albinali to appear for a deposition within 20 days. However, Calvert’s $3,000 sanction request was denied on a technicality.
Delaying Tactics
Twenty days passed, and there was still no deposition. Albinali’s counsel offered December 2, 2022, as the final date but claimed their client would not have a laptop at the proceedings. Calvert’s lawyer denied the schedule, and rightfully so. There was no point in deposing Albinali when she couldn’t be presented with evidence during the process.
Albinali’s counsel then attempted the same thing, calling Calvert’s lawyer on December 12 and requesting to hold the deposition the same day, with Albinali still without a laptop. They got a resounding no.
Calvert filed for a $7,000 sanction due to this, which the court approved and ordered to be paid in 10 days. Albinali was also ordered to attend the deposition on or before December 23, and the court warned her that it would “‘consider terminating sanctions and/or dismissal of the case’ if she did not appear for her continued deposition.”
In response, Albinali’s counsel substituted out of the case, leaving her again to represent their own. It’s starting to look like Albinali is using the change of counsel to delay the legal proceedings.
The Last Straw
On January 24, 2023, Calvert filed a motion for termination and/or monetary sanctions against Albinali, amounting to approximately $56,000.
Albinali responded, saying that Calvert did not inform her of the trial date for the motion for termination or serve her a motion to dismiss. She had new counsel and would be ready to continue the deposition in March.
March rolled by, and the case came with many new developments. Albinali claimed that the initial deposition was rife with discovery abuses, specifically about Calvert’s counsel asking inappropriate, relevant, and “harassing” questions during their first session. However, the official transcript of the deposition contained no such questions, and her claim was promptly dismissed.
As for the missed deposition deadlines, she cited that “catastrophic life events” had her hands tied and that her lawyer at that time offered to complete the deposition several times (you know, the one where she wouldn’t have a laptop). She also hadn’t paid the $7,000 sanction. Due to the continued delays and excuses, the court imposed further monetary sanctions against Albinali to the tune of $22,900.
After her current lawyer was swapped out of the case again and a hearing was missed in May, the court finally ruled in favor of Calvert, dismissing her $75,000 claim and ordering Albinali to pay $29,900 instead.
Round Three: The Appeal
Albinali filed a surprisingly timely motion to appeal on June 30, 2023, stating that “the trial court abused its discretion in dismissing her case” and all monetary sanctions towards her should be voided.
The core pillar of her argument was that “the court erred in imposing terminating sanctions against her solely because she failed to pay monetary sanctions despite numerous court orders directing her to do so.”
Now, citing errors in the judicial proceedings or the facts laid out during the case is a common basis for an appeal. This is how many cases are overturned in appellate courts. With her timely appeal, Albinali had a foot in the door and had a shot of keeping her case alive and reversing the court order to get her original $75,000 win.
However, her claim was undone by one detail: she submitted NO TRANSCRIPTS OF ANY OF THE LEGAL PROCEEDINGS SHE WAS CALLING INTO QUESTION.
The Importance of Legal Transcriptions In Appellate Courts
In a final decision, the court ruled that Albinali’s claim was voided and ordered her to pay Calvert $22,900 plus any legal fees. The first $7,000 sanction was voided, too, but this was a definite win for the plastic surgeon. Albinali, meanwhile, missed out on the original $75,000 payout from the Canadian court ruling.
The appellate court noted that Albinali showed “a long history of delay, obstruction, misrepresentations, and noncompliance with court orders.” This is a big red mark against her, and it certainly affected her chance of winning.
However, who could say what would have happened if she had gotten her defense and evidence together? What if she had a transcript that could be dissected and interpreted?
This underlines the importance of transcripts for ALL LEGAL AND COURT PROCEEDINGS, regardless of perceived importance. The appellant is responsible for providing proof of procedural or factual issues. Without the transcripts, Albinali gave the appeals court nothing to support her claim, and her appeal was rightfully dismissed for inadequate documentation.
Ditto Provides Certified Transcripts To Be Used For Appeals
Many litigants face similar issues—whether in civil litigation or family court matters where parents’ custody rights hang in the balance. Without certified transcripts, even potentially valid legal arguments can be rendered useless.
Fortunately, legal transcription companies like Ditto Transcripts directly address these challenges. We do our best to provide certified transcripts that meet court requirements for appeals.
Why Choose Ditto Transcripts As Your Legal Transcription Partner?
When the stakes are high, and you need certified legal transcripts for your case, Ditto Transcripts has everything you need. We’re the go-to option for legal professionals nationwide.
Some of what you can expect from us are the following:
- Time-Tested Experience: 14 years in the legal trenches means we don’t simply transcribe legal terminology—we understand it.
- Accuracy You Can Count On: We deliver 99% accuracy because “close enough” isn’t in our vocabulary in legal proceedings. Every word matters, and we treat them accordingly.
- Court-Ready Certification: Our certified transcripts meet court admissibility requirements. There are no returned documents or hassles – just clean, court-accepted documentation.
- Fort Knox-Level Security: We’re HIPAA and CJIS-compliant; only U.S.-based, background-checked professionals handle your files. Your sensitive legal materials never leave American soil or secure hands.
- Speed When You Need It: Life doesn’t wait, and neither should you. Choose from 4-hour rush delivery to standard 6-10 business day turnaround. Your deadline, your choice.
- Smart Pricing: Premium service shouldn’t mean premium prices. We run about 50% leaner than traditional court reporting firms while maintaining top-tier quality.
- Full-Service Solutions: From hearings to depositions, interviews to legal proceedings – if it needs transcribing, we’ve got you covered.
- Español? ¡Por supuesto!: Do you need a Spanish legal translation? We’ve got specialized experts ready to handle your multilingual legal needs.
- Customer Support That Has Your Back: Enjoy toll-free dictation, phone support, a free iPhone app, and unlimited assistance – all without getting trapped in long-term contracts.
We Understand The Importance Of Transcripts In Appellate Reviews
Don’t be the next Albinali v. Calvert example or settle for cheap, inaccurate services or pay through the nose for expensive ones. Remember, a reputable transcription company with over a decade of legal experience, like Ditto Transcripts, will never compromise on the quality of your legal transcripts.
Contact Ditto for reliable, accurate, and affordable legal and verbatim court proceeding transcription. You can request a sample transcription to assess the quality of our service at any time.
Ditto Transcripts is a CJIS-compliant Denver, Colorado-based transcription services company that provides fast, accurate, and affordable transcripts for individuals and companies of all sizes. Call (720) 287-3710 today for a free quote, and ask about our free five-day trial.
