The trial court did not err in awarding $100,000 in punitive damages against Davidson for repeatedly kicking and punching Morgan, her neighbor. The repeated blows were sufficient evidence of an intent to injure, and thus malice.  Morgan was excused from presenting evidence of Davidson’s wealth since he timely served notices to produce financial records in lieu of subpoenas and Davidson failed to produce documents in response. A Riverside local rule requiring a party to lodge the original and one copy of any deposition it intended to use at trial did not conflict with CCP  2025.620 and were enforceable.  This decision upholds the trial court’s exclusion of cross-examination from a deposition which had not been filed in compliance with this rule and which the cross-examiner could not produce a certified copy of at the time he attempted the cross-examination.  Without a bound, certified copy, there was no assurance that the transcript had not been altered. The continuous accrual rule delaying accrual of the statute of limitations did not apply to defendant’s invasion of privacy claim that plaintiff had intrusively filmed activities on defendant’s adjoining property, in particular defendant’s daughter’s use of a trampoline.  There was no allegation or showing that the wrongful course of conduct became apparent only through the accumulation of a series of harms.

California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division 2 (Miller, J.); November 27, 2018; 29 Cal. App. 5th 540