3/24/2024 0 Comments Bill of particulars californiaTrue, you will be disclosing, early on, “fundamental information” such as your client’s damages and the identities of witnesses with knowledge of the relevant facts, but defendants will have to do the same when they answer. If your action falls under economic litigation for limited civil cases, serve a case questionnaire with your complaint. If you strike pay dirt, that’s the time to add more claims and larger damage prayers. In other words, let the discovery responses be your guide. Without more complete information, we cannot say that there is no reasonable possibility of real party stating a class action with respect to at least some of the nonresidents. In essence, Union Mutual asks us to declare that the discovery sought in the Group III interrogatories is improper because the purpose of it is to obtain information which will be of assistance to real party in amending his complaint to state a cause of action for a ‘national class action.’ This is the precise reason why the discovery should be permitted. Relevancy of the subject matter is determined by the potential as well as actual issues in the case … In the case at bench, real party should not be denied the opportunity to obtain further information simply because of the uncertainty as to whether or not such information will enable him to bring a national class action. It is well established that relevancy of the subject matter does not depend upon a legally sufficient pleading, nor is it restricted to the issues formally raised in the pleadings. v Superior Court (1978) 80 Cal.App.3d 1, is illustrative. You can use discovery to search for information that may justify new causes of action or the addition of punitive damages. Meanwhile start your own discovery, and make it thorough. By slimming down your pleading, you will avoid a demurrer and a slug of interrogatories. Just include the simplest claims at your disposal: negligence, malpractice, breach of contract. Unless you have the hard facts at your disposal, don’t ask for punitive damages when you draft a new complaint. If you do, don’t bother reading the rest of this article. Most of you will be familiar with at least some of the following suggestions, but thanks perhaps to the luck of the draw, I rarely see them in court. If nothing else, it may convince the other side that they have an opponent who’s willing to dig deep into the law. It doesn’t have to be a magic bullet that ends a case a move or tactic that changes a lawsuit’s complexion can be equally significant. Surprise me by finding something in the dark corners of the Evidence Code or the unswept crannies of the Code of Civil Procedure (CCP). So the message of this article is a simple one: surprise me. 427…)” Now lawyers rely on both sections when they object to an expert opinion. (See Imwinkelried & Faigman, Evidence Code Section 802: The Neglected Key to Rationalizing the California Law of Expert Testimony (2009) 42 Loyola L.A. We must also consider Evidence Code section 802. University of Southern California (2013) 55 Cal.4th 747, in which our Supreme Court wrote: “Additionally, as a recent law review article explains, Evidence Code section 801 is not the only statute that governs the trial court’s gatekeeping role. The section remained in the shadows until Sargon Enterprises, Inc. The then most significant decision in the field, Lockheed Litigation Cases (2004) 115 Cal.App.4th 558, failed to cite it even once. Until 2013, most opinions about this topic focused on Evidence Code section 801 and ignored its neighbor, Evidence Code section 802. A recent example occurred in connection with the trial court’s gatekeeping role with respect to expert witnesses. A statute can hide in plain sight for years before being discovered. Our procedural jurisprudence abounds with possibilities that a number of attorneys don’t consider or may not realize exist. While I appreciate counsel who handle their cases efficiently within the parameters of our rules (and most do), at times I would enjoy a little more derring-do. This oddity doesn’t go away upon becoming a judge. We live for the rush of a new tactic and savor the sleeping statute. Something in a lawyer’s genes makes us admire procedure, especially the novel twists.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |