In Sigala v. Anaheim City School Dist. (1993) 15 Cal.App.4th 661 the defendant was insured through a joint powers association which required all 15 members of the board to approve settlement of any suit. The trial court set several mandatory settlement conferences. At each conference the defendant was represented by counsel, who informed the trial court that the board had reviewed the matter and it refused to make any offer to settle the matter. This decision could only be changed by a vote of the entire board. Frustrated, the trial court ordered the entire 15-member board to court so that a meaningful settlement conference could occur. When the board failed to appear as ordered, the trial court struck the defendant's request for a trial de novo and entered judgment for the plaintiff on the arbitrator's award. The appellate court acknowledged the misfeasance of the defendant in failing to participate in good faith at the settlement conference, but held the sanction imposed was excessive because the trial court did not advise the defendant that it would consider striking its pleading and because a sanction resulting in judgment for the opposing party is seldom appropriate in the first instance. ( Id. at pp. 673-674.)