Skip to Content (Press Enter)

Skip to Nav (Press Enter)

Evidence

The following summaries are of recent published decisions of the California appellate courts, the Ninth Circuit, and the United States Supreme Court. The summaries are presented without regard to whether Severson & Werson represented a party in the case.

Subscribe to California Appellate Tracker

Thank you for your desire to subscribe to Severson & Werson’s Appellate Tracker Weblog. In order to subscribe, you must provide a valid name and e-mail address. This too will be retained on our server. When you push the “subscribe button”, we will send an electronic mail to the address that you provided asking you to confirm your subscription to our Weblog. By pushing the “subscribe button”, you represent and warrant that you are over the age of 18 years old, are the owner/authorized user of that e-mail address, and are entitled to receive e-mails at that address. Our weblog will retain your name and e-mail address on its server, or the server of its web host. However, we won’t share any of this information with anyone except the Firm’s employees and contractors, except under certain extraordinary circumstances described on our Privacy Policy and (About The Consumer Finance Blog/About the Appellate Tracker Weblog) Page. NOTICE AND AGREEMENT REGARDING E-MAILS AND CALLS/TEXT MESSAGES TO LAND-LINE AND WIRELESS TELEPHONES: By providing your contact information and confirming your subscription in response to the initial e-mail that we send you, you agree to receive e-mail messages from Severson & Werson from time-to-time and understand and agree that such messages are or may be sent by means of automated dialing technology. If you have your email forwarded to other electronic media, including text messages and cellular telephone by way of VoIP, internet, social media, or otherwise, you agree to receive my messages in that way. This may result in charges to you. Your agreement and consent also extend to any other agents, affiliates, or entities to whom our communications are forwarded. You agree that you will notify Severson & Werson in writing if you revoke this agreement and that your revocation will not be effective until you notify Severson & Werson in writing. You understand and agree that you will afford Severson & Werson a reasonable time to unsubscribe you from the website, that the ability to do so depends on Severson & Werson’s press of business and access to the weblog, and that you may still receive one or more emails or communications from weblog until we are able to unsubscribe you.

No matter how the attorney receives another party’s inadvertently produced privileged material, the attorney owes a duty to notify the privilege holder and await a court’s resolution of any dispute over existence or waiver of the privilege; failure to do so may lead to disqualification.  Read More

The trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting a letter, containing a remark showing callous indifference to worker death from asbestos, because the letter showed the employer was on notice of the risks of asbestos early, and prejudice from the callous remark was avoided by a jury instruction limiting consideration of the letter to the issue of notice… Read More

Attorney-client privilege does not shield communications among plaintiff, his attorney, and a third party public relations firm whom plaintiff hired to smear defendants in an attempt to induce a favorable settlement.  Read More

Defendant hospital's report to Board of Registered Nursing regarding plaintiff, a registered nurse, and her allegedly improper monitoring of a patient to whom she had given narcotics, was absolutely privileged under Civ. Code 47(b) and therefore could not be the subject of a viable defamation claim.  Read More

If a party fails to exchange expert witness information in response to a timely demand, and the time to respond expires before the summary judgment motion is filed, the non-responding party may not rely on expert testimony to oppose the summary judgment motion over the moving party's objection, unless the trial court relieves the non-responding party of its default.  Read More

Corporation’s general counsel’s email to the press about its recently-filed lawsuit was not protected by the absolute litigation privilege but was protected by the privilege for fair and true reports to a publication about a judicial proceeding.  Read More

Neither the statute of frauds nor the parol evidence rule precluded a real estate broker’s suit for her commission, as she could rely on extrinsic evidence to show that the one owner who signed her listing agreement did so as agent for the other owners.  Read More

Neither the psychotherapist-patient privilege nor the state constitutional right of privacy is absolute, and consequently neither of these defeats the statutory requirement that mental health professionals report their patients to the police or child welfare agencies when the patients disclose that they have accessed child pornography through electronic or digital media.  Read More

Attorney fee bills may or may not be privileged, depending on whether they convey information for the purpose of legal representation, such as informing the client of the nature and amount of work being performed in a currently active, pending case Read More

The litigation privilege immunized a doctor from being sued by a bus driver, after the doctor refused to certify him for a commercial driver’s license and wrote to the DMV that plaintiff posed a risk to himself and others due to specified cognitive deficits.  Read More

Communications between the Agricultural Labor Relations Board and its general counsel are subject to the attorney-client privilege insofar as the communications pertain to the decision whether the Board should file a complaint seeking injunctive relief in court.  Read More

In this car crash case, substantial evidence existed to support jury verdict in favor of defendant, after defendant testified that he mistakenly—but in his opinion, reasonably—thought he could get through intersection safely before plaintiff's car came through in a cross-direction.  Read More

Evidence of the amount a medical finance company paid the provider for its lien on plaintiff’s personal injury claim is properly excluded as it is only marginally relevant to the reasonable value of the medical provider’s services, and rebuttal evidence would consume too much time, distracting the jury from the central issues in the case.  Read More

A declarant's statement incriminating himself and denying involvement by others, including the defendant in this case, is sufficiently against the declarant's penal interest to allow its admission in evidence under the statement against interest exception to the hearsay rule in Evidence Code 1230.  Read More

Trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting photos of cars post-accident without supporting expert testimony since they showed minimal car damages, impugning credibility of plaintiff who claimed to be injured in a car accident but had no medical confirmation.  Read More

Psychotherapist-patient privilege protected doctor from obligation to comply with subpoena from the Medical Board, which had requested records in association with patient complaint, because before the Board moved to enforce its subpoena, the patient in question revoked his waiver of the privilege.  Read More

In an antitrust suit claiming car manufacturers conspired to keep their lower priced but otherwise identical cars sold in Canada from being exported to the United States where they could be sold for less than the same models sold for the United States market, summary judgment was properly granted to Ford US  because there was no evidence it had done… Read More

A federal prosecutor is not entitled to immunity for executing an affidavit supporting a subpoena of witness's medical records, which falsely represented the witness as a crime victim rather than an alibi witness.  Read More

1 3 4 5 6