Evidence

An administrative hearing need not be conducted according to the rules of procedure and evidence used in civil trials.  Instead, any relevant evidence may be considered if it is the sort of evidence on which responsible persons are accustomed to rely in the conduct of serious affairs. (Gov. Code, § 11513(c).)  So, here the department's hearing officer did not err… Read More

In reviewing a Workplace Violence Prevention Order, the Court of Appeal applies the substantial evidence rule, but also takes into account the fact that the plaintiff bears the burden of producing clear and convincing evidence of a credible threat of violence.  So it must determine whether the trial court could, based on the evidence, have found it highly probable that… Read More

Same deferential standard of review applies whether evidence presented to trial court is live testimony or written affidavits and exhibits. Read More

The trial court correctly granted defendant summary judgment in this slip-and-fall injury suit in an exercise facility's sauna room.  The release of claims in the fitness center's membership agreement absolved the fitness center of liability for ordinary negligence.  Plaintiff failed to submit evidence creating a triable issue of fact as to gross negligence.  She claimed to have fallen because the… Read More

Plaintiff sued for defamation, alleging that defendants falsely told several reporters that plaintiff had provided explicit nude photographs of Bezos to the National Enquirer as part of a conspiracy to damage Bezos.  On defendants' Anti-SLAPP motion, plaintiff's only evidence was his declaration stating that several news reporters had told him that Bezos told them plaintiff had given the photos to… Read More

The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendants' motion to disqualify plaintiff's outside counsel firm, Pillsbury, on the ground that Pillsbury had hired two attorneys who eight years before had been associates at Sedgwick and while there had represented some of the defendant insurers in other coverage disputes involving different insureds.  Defendants' evidence failed to show that… Read More

Summary judgment for defendant affirmed.  Defendant met its initial burden of disproving causation, a necessary element of plaintiffs' claims, by evidence showing that (a) stray voltage must exceed certain levels to be felt by a human being and that the voltages in plaintiffs' home were far lower, (b) a person would receive a shock only by touching surfaces with differing… Read More

Testimony by individual legislators (or here, county supervisors) is inadmissible to prove legislative intent since the requisite intent is that of the entire body, not the individual legislator or supervisor. Read More

An award of punitive damages was excessive where it equaled the full value of the only asset that the defendant was shown to own.  It is plaintiff's burden to produce evidence demonstrating the defendant's financial condition--including both assets and liabilities.  Here, plaintiff failed to present evidence of liabilities or show that defendant had more than a minimal annual income.  Proof… Read More

A medical expert testifying about causation in support of the party bearing the burden of proof in a medical malpractice case must be able to express an opinion “to a reasonable medical probability,” which means more likely than not.  If the defendant tries to prove that something other than its alleged negligence caused plaintiff's injury, it bears the burden of… Read More

Under Evid. Code 1222, authorized admissions are an exception to the hearsay rule.  This decision holds that the exception applies to any authorized statements by an agent or employee, whether made to third parties or to other agents or employees of the same principal.  It also holds that under Dart Industries, Inc. v. Commercial Union Ins. Co. (2002) 28 Cal.4th… Read More

An apex deposition of the head of a governmental department is allowed only with the agency head is shown to have direct personal factual (as opposed to legal) knowledge of information pertinent to material issues in litigation and the agency head's information is not available through another source.  Here, an apex deposition of the former district attorney was not allowed… Read More

Statistical evidence is admissible to establish predominance under FRCivP 23(b)(3) if that evidence would be admissible in an individual action on the same claim, the statistical evidence is linked to the plaintiffs' theory of liability and the use of averaging assumptions does not conceal the variations that otherwise would defeat class certification.  Here, plaintiffs' statistical evidence satisfied those three tests. … Read More

The district attorneys of several counties served Alorica with an investigative subpoena to produce records regarding it debt collection practices and in particular with respect to its collections for a national bank.  Held, the subpoena was properly enforced.  That Alorica claims not to be a debt collector within the meaning of the Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act is no… Read More

Plaintiff sued defendant for stalking her and firing crossbow bolts and bullets at her office.  The trial court did not err in admitting into evidence an audio recording of a telephone call plaintiff made to defendant at the request of the police.  The recording was adequately authenticated.  Plaintiff testified she recognizes the voices on the tape as hers and defendant's. … Read More

A severely retarded resident of a care facility sued it for damages suffered in a sexual assault by a handyman on the facility's premises.  The decision holds that the trial court abused its discretion in excluding portions of a police report which the plaintiff relied on in opposition to the facility's summary judgment motion.  The police report was excepted from… Read More

Largely affirming Walgren v. Coleco Industries, Inc. (1984) 151 Cal.App.3d 543, this decision holds that, in general, testimony given in a discovery deposition in a prior case cannot be introduced at trial under Evid. Code 1291(a)(2) in another against a party present at the deposition because the motives and interest of a party at a deposition generally is dissimilar from… Read More

This decision holds that under Evid. Code 721(b)(3), an expert may be cross-examined by a scientific or professional publication if the publication is established as a reliable authority by the cross-examined expert, another expert or judicial notice.  Such a publication may be used even if the testifying expert did not consult it in preparing his opinion.  Here, the testifying expert… Read More

A well-established departure from the hearsay rule applies when the very fact in controversy is whether certain things were said, and not whether these things were true or false.  Hence, in a breach of contract case, the contract is not hearsay.  The contract must be authenticated, but here the plaintiff did so by showing that it had received an assignment… Read More

Under Evid. Code 1158, a medical care provider must make patients' medical records available for their attorneys' inspection.  The section also limits how much the medical care provider may charge for making copies of the records for the patient or his attorney.  In Thornburg v. Superior Court (2006) 138 Cal.App.4th 43, the court held that the fee limits also apply… Read More