Discovery

This decision outlines the seven factors a trial court should consider in deciding a third party's motion to quash a subpoena served on it by a criminal defendant.  Most important of those factors, particularly when the subpoena seeks social media posts, are the defendant's proof of a plausible justification for needing the subpoenaed documents and the consideration of privacy and… Read More

Distinguishing Andrews v. Foster Wheeler (2006) 138 Cal.App.4th 96 and following Gaggero v. Yura (2003) 108 Cal.App.4th 884 instead, this decision holds that no logical inference that the plaintiff possesses no facts to support his claim can be drawn from the plaintiff's improper use of the procedure under CCP 2030.230 (pointing to documents from which an answer can be drawn)… Read More

A judgment creditor’s discovery from a third party must be limited to documents or testimony concerning whether the third party is indebted to or holds any property of the judgment debtor. Read More

Law firm’s investigative due diligence report, completed prior to an acquisition to determine whether target company was in possession of another’s protected trade secrets, is not protected from discovery by any attorney-client privilege because it was jointly directed by and shared with opposing parties in the acquisition negotiations; and it was not protected by the work product privilege because it… Read More

Law firm’s investigative due diligence report, completed prior to an acquisition to determine whether target company was in possession of another’s protected trade secrets, is not protected from discovery by any attorney-client privilege because it was jointly directed by and shared with opposing parties in the acquisition negotiations; and it was not protected by the work product privilege because it… Read More

The notice of motion, memorandum, and all supporting papers in support of a discovery motion to compel and for sanctions must be filed and served by the Discovery Act’s 60-day deadline, not just the notice of motion alone. Read More

Testimony during a Rule 30(b)(6) deposition does not absolutely bind the corporation in the sense of a judicial admission, but rather is evidence that—like other deposition testimony—can be corrected, explained, supplemented or contradicted. Read More

The federal Stored Communications Act, 18 U.S.C. 2701 et seq., permitted San Francisco to issue an administrative subpoena to the owner of a website that sought records of transactions involving short-term rentals for tax purposes. Read More

Denials of requests for admission are not admissible evidence at trial. Read More

Only the prosecutor, not any third party, owes a criminal defendant a duty to disclose material exculpatory evidence, and even the prosecutor need not disclose such evidence if it is developed by a third party not acting under the prosecutor’s control.  Read More