You will need the Flash plugin to view this publication

Download the Flash plugin for free here. Just refresh this page after installing Flash.
Also make sure that javascript is enabled in your browser.

Alternatively, you can download this publication in PDF-format - Click here.

Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
Page 8
Page 9
Page 10
Page 11
Page 12
Page 13
Page 14
Page 15
Page 16
Page 17
Page 18
Page 19
Page 20
Page 21
Page 22
Page 23
Page 24
Page 25
Page 26
Page 27
Page 28
Page 29
Page 30
Page 31
Page 32
Page 33
Page 34
Page 35
Page 36
Page 37
Page 38
Page 39
Page 40
Page 41
Page 42
Page 43
Page 44
Page 45
Page 46
Page 47
Page 48
Page 49
Page 50
Page 51
Page 52
associationofsoutherncaliforniadefensecounselVolume12013INSIDEAnnualSeminarRecapandPhotoGalleryAttorneyFeeDefensesClassActionNoticeCostsAttorneyLiabilityandtheLitigationPrivilegeDepositionTipsToxicTortsandmore.... Volume12013verdict1AccordingtothemajorityscharacterizatconspiracyInthisdisputebetweennplaintisprevailedinaprioractionestablisneighborMarvinGoodriendhadunlawucontaminateddebrisontheirproperty.Judorplaintis.Thejudgmentrequiredthenthedebrispursuanttoacourt-approvedreundsortheremediationplanwereplacedotheneighborsattorneysthelawyer-deREASONSWHYverdicttheassociationofsoutherncaliforniadefensecounsel2520ventureoakswaysuite150sacramentoca95833KarlRove10AttorneyFees17Rickleyv.Goodfriend23Opt-OutNotice21features10GOPStategistKarlRoveAddressesthe52ndAnnualSeminarCarolSherman17JudgesPowertoDenyInatedAttorneyFeeRequestsinCodeofCivilProcedureSection1717CasesHon.AlexRicciardulli21InReInsuranceInstallmentCasesOpt-OutNoticetoPunitiveClassMemberstoBePaidbyPlaintiffsKimStone23Rickleyv.GoodfriendaNewOpinionThatExpandsLawyersLiabilityandWhatASCDCIsDoingAboutItHarryChamberlainIntroductionbyLisaPerrochet27YoungLawyersSectionEffectivelyPreparingforandTakinganExpertDepositionJohnHolcombJr.andDanielKramer30RegulatoryRiskAssessmentandTortLiablilityDavidAxelraddepartments2IndextoAdvertisers3PresidentsMessagebyN.DeniseTaylor5CapitolCommentbyMichaelD.Belote6NewMembers7WhatWeDobyPatrickA.Long35DefenseVerdicts36AmicusCommitteeReport39YoureInvitedbyN.DeniseTaylor36ExecutiveCommitteeBoardofDirectors 2verdictVolume12013VerdictMagazineispublishedformembersofTheAssociationofSouthernCaliforniaDefenseCounselASCDC.TheopinionsandadviceinVerdictMagazinearethoseofthesubmittingauthorsandarenotnecessarilythoseofASCDC.Allrightsarereservedinallcountries.NopartofthismagazinemaybereproducedinanyformwithoutwrittenconsentfromVerdictMagazine.EditorialproductionandadvertisingocesatVerdictMagazine2520VentureOaksWaySuite150SacramentoCA95833.Telephone800564-6791.Returnpostagemustaccompanyanyunsolicitedmaterialifitistobereturned.VerdictMagazineassumesnoresponsibilityforsuchmaterials.theassociationofsoutherncaliforniadefensecounselindextoadvertisersADRServicesInc.19ArrowheadEvaluationServices41ExecutivePresentations13FieldsADR37FirstMediationCorp.33ForensisGroup4GreinesMartinSteinRichlandLLP14JackDaniels32PMADisputeResolution26JudicateWest29KGAInc.31KusarCourtReportersInsideFrontCover16PhillipFeldmanLawOffices30ProConsulInc.8RoughanAssociates20verdict2520ventureoakswaysuite150sacramentoca95833staffeditorLisaPerrochetexecutivedirectorJenniferBlevinsartdirectorJohnBerkowitzcontributorsMichaelD.BeloteHarryChamberlainJohnHolcombDanielKramerPatrickA.LongHon.AlexRiccierdulliCarolShermanKimStoneN.DeniseTaylorprintingSig-1PrintingassociationofsoutherncaliforniadefensecounselofficerspresidentN.DeniseTaylorpresident-electRobertA.OlsonvicepresidentMichaelSchonbuchsecretary-treasurerGlennT.BargerboardofdirectorsJamesB.ColeMichaelA.ColtonJulianneDeMarcoPeterS.DoodyChristopherE.FaenzaThomasP.FeherClarkR.HudsonDanKramerEdwardLeonardLisaJ.McMainsGaryT.MontgomeryStephenC.PasarowLisaPerrochetLawrenceR.RamseyNinosP.SaroukhanioffJohnW.ShawPatrickStockalperJeffreyA.WalkerForadvertisinginformationcontacttheASCDCbelowexecutiveoffices2520VentureOaksWaySuite150SacramentoCA95833800-564-6791ascdccamgmt.comwww.ascdc.org Volume12013verdict3N.DeniseTaylorASCDC2013PresidentpresidentsmessageItismyprivilegetobeASCDCPresident.Wehavealotoimportantworktodothisyearbutwiththeassistanceomyellowocersandboardweareuptothetask.AsIsaidinmyremarksattheAnnualSeminarthisisamostchallengingtimetopracticelawinCaliornianotjustordeenselawyersbutoreveryone.Aerourcourtssustained105millionobudgetarycutslastyearwhichresultedinbothcourthouseandcourtroomclosuresandsignicantlayofsocourtpersonnelwearenowacingbetween56millionto85millioninadditionalcutstothecourtbudgetbyJune.OurbiggestcourtLosAngeleshasbeenhitthehardest.Inaneforttodealwiththesebudgetcutsthecourthasmadedrasticchangesthatasothiswritingarestillintheprocessobeingnalizedandimplemented.Tesechangeswillundamentallyalterthewaythatalargepercentageoourmembersthosewhodeendpersonalinjurycasesincludingmedicalmalpracticeproductsliabilityandgeneralliabilitycasespractice.Tesecaseswillnolongerbemanagedbyonejudgeromlingtotrialnorwilldeendantsgettheirdayincourtbeoreajuryotheirpeersintheirneighborhoodcourthouse.InsteadallPIcaseswillbeleddowntowninoneothreePIdepartmentsandwhenitstimeortrialthecasewillbeassignedouttooneo31trialcourtsinsevendiferentcourthousesthroughoutthecounty.Terewillinevitablybeconusioninthecomingmonths.Atthispointnooneknowshowthisisreallygoingtowork.WhatarewedoingatASCDCtohelpthecourtswiththismostdicultproblemAndwhatarewedoingtokeepyouourmembersinormedFirstwehavebeenatthetablewithpresidingJudgeDanBuckleytoprovideinputonhowtomakethisdicultsituationaspalatabletothedeensebaraspossiblebyattendingregularmeetingsothePICaseAdvisoryCommitteeormedlastDecember.WiththeundingorthecourtADRservicegonewearenowworkingwiththecourtonwaystogetourmembersinvolvedinavoluntaryADRservicetosupplementthededicatedMSCjudgesorthePIcases.Tisyearwehavealreadyco-sponsoredaseminarwithCAALAtointroducethisrestructuringothecourtandhowitwillimpactourpractices.JudgeBuckleyhasagreedtospeaktousagainonJuly182013toletusknowhowitsgoingsoar.LookorASCDCe-mailsorcheckourwebsiteorurtherdetailsinthecomingmonths.Troughinormationalseminarsande-mailblastswewillkeepourmembersupdatedontheseimportantchanges.TroughtheCaliorniaDeenseCounselCDCwecontinuetomakeourpresenceknowninSacramento.CDCservesasalobbyingefortorbothASCDCandADCourcolleaguesintheNorth.OnFebruary15wemetwithChieJusticeaniCantil-Sakayueandherstaf.TeChieJusticeasalwayswaswelcomingandgenuinelyinterestedtoknowhowthecourtscanhelpusascivildeenselawyers.Equallyimportantwasherrequestoreedbackromusonwayswecanhelpthecourtsgetthroughthisbudgetcrisis.CDCgivesusavoiceinSacramentoasacounter-balancetotheplaintifsbar.TeplaintifattorneyshavemoremoneybutwehaveMikeBelotetohelpgetissuesthatareimportanttousandourclientsinrontoourlawmakers.IyouhaventmadeadonationtoCDCpleasedosotoday.ASCDChasneverhadmoretooferourmembers.JustreadthisissueoVerdictandseeallthatmembershipbrings.IhavebeenamembermyentirecareerandIcanhonestlysaythatoneothebestthingsIhavedoneistogetinvolvedinASCDC.Ihavemetlie-longriendsthroughthisorganizationandsomuchomysuccessasalawyerisrelatedtotheconnectionsthatIhavemadethroughASCDC.Tenetworkingopportunitiesandriendshipsmadethroughmembershipareinvaluable.Iencourageyoutocallore-mailmeiyouneedhelpromourAmicusCommitteehaveasuggestionoraseminarorknowaspeakerorsubjectthatwouldbeinterestingtoourmembersoriyouwanttovolunteeroracommittee.YouareASCDC.Ourboardisactiveenergeticandcommittedtoserveyou.Wewillbeevenstrongerwithyourparticipation.AlthoughthisyearwillbeachallengewithyourhelpIamlookingorwardtoagreatyear. 4verdictVolume12013 Volume12013verdict5MichaelD.BeloteLegislativeAdvocateCaliforniaDefenseCounselcapitolcommentLotsaBillsTheCaliorniaLegislaturewasonceamouslyreerredtoasabillactoryandnotinapositiveway.TereasonsortheprodigiousoutputotheAssemblyandSenateareopentodebatebuttwobigculpritsarenodoubtourull-timelegislatureandtheactthatCaliorniaisahighlycodifedstatewithagreatdealostatutorylawtomanage.WhenthebillintroductiondeadlinepassedonFebruary22statelegislatorshadintroducedatotalo2189newproposals.Andthistotalisdownromrecentyearsprobablyduetotheactthatalmostexactlyone-thirdoalllegislatorswerebrandnewinJanuary.Whenyourealizethatbillsareoenamendedourorfvetimesbeorepassageordeeatsometimesmakingbillsonointerestintobillsogreatinterestthatisonebigpileolegislation.Over100othe2189billshavebeenidentifedopotentialinteresttodeensepractitioners.AllareavailableorviewingthroughtheASCDCwebsite.Virtuallyeverypossibleareaodeensepracticeisaddressedbyoneormorebillsincludingmedicalmalpracticeconstructiondeectemploymentdisabilityandmanymore.ButhereisthespoileralertatleastasonownobillispendingonHowellorConcepcionorMICRA.IanyothesehighlycontroversialissuesareaddressedthisyearitwillhavetobethroughbillsamendedbetweennowandSeptember13.AndtheamendmentscouldhappenrightbeforeSeptember13.TusarCDChasbeenactiveindiscussionsonAB715Dickinsonwhichwouldspeciyadenovostandardoappellaterevieworevidentiaryissuesinsummaryjudgmentmatters.CDCexpressedoppositiontotheproposalandthehearingonthebillhasbeencancelled.WehavealsobeeninvolvedinAB648Jones-SawyerrelatingtochargesorcourtreportersinlawandmotionmattersandonAB788Wagnerrelatingtoownershipandtranserocourttranscripts.Assummerapproacheshowevertheoverridingissuecontinuestobeundingchallengesacingthecourts.Anastonishing61courthouseshavebeenclosedduetobudgetreductionsvirtuallyallsatellitecourtshavebeenclosedinanumberocountiesincludingSanBernardinoandASCDCmembersareawareoverydramaticchangesincivilcaseprocessinginLosAngeles.Tatisjustasmallsubsetothebadnewswhengeneralundsupportorthecourtsisreducedbyover30.Tereissomelimitedgoodnewshowever.Legislatorsobothpartiesareexpressingverybroadagreementthatcourtbudgetcutshavebeendevastating.AnewplanorallocatingundstothetrialcourtshasbeenadoptedbytheJudicialCouncilwhichhasbeenviewedtosomedegreeasaconditionprecedentorobtainingincreasedstatesupport.Tirdtaxrevenuescontinuetocomeinaboveprojections.CDChasbeenconstantinadvocatingorstatereinvestmentinthecourtsystemandwehavebeenoneothemajorparticipantsinabroad-basedlegalcoalitionknownastheOpenCourtsCoalition.Temissionnowistoturntheconsensusthatcourtshavebeenunderundedintoconcretereinvestmentorbudgetyear2013-2014.Obviouslywithnewsthattaxreceiptsareincreasingadvocatesoralltypesoprogramswillbeseekingrestorationocuts.TenextmajorbudgetactionwillbereleaseotheGovernorsrevisedspendingproposalornextyearknownastheMayRevision.Budgetlobbyingwillcontinueuntiltheexpectedenactmentoanon-timebudgetpriortothebeginningothenextfscalyearonJuly1.ASCDCmemberswillshortlyreceivearequesttovisitcallandwritestateSenatorsandAssemblymemberstohelpspreadthemessageaboutcourtunding.Tecourtshaveewnaturalalliesotherthanlawyersandgrassrootslobbyingisessential.Terequestorassistancealsowillincludetalkingpointsabouttheneedorreinvestment. 6verdictVolume12013newmembersjanuarymarchArcherNorrisKaylaS.S.BetboutMarkFuruyaJeanLantzDanielMcKenzieBrianC.MergesBeamBrobeckWesBorgesRosaLouiseM.DouvilleSponsoringMemberDavidJ.BrobeckBlauAssociaesDavidBlauSponsoringMemberJoyiaGreeneldBonneBridgesMuellerOKeefeNicholsEricE.HartmansSponsoringMemberBrianL.HomanBoohLLPJasonM.BoothTeodoreV.KrepsSponsoringMemberMargaretDruganBoceSchaeerLLPKarenA.NewcombSponsoringMemberJamesC.SchaeerBuchalerNemerP.C.RobertDatoSponsoringMemberHarryW.R.ChamberlainCallahanTompsonShermanCaudillLLPDeniseM.CalkinsCarrollKelltroerFranzenMcKennaBlakenyA.BoggsSponsoringMemberDavidPruettChapmanGlucksmanDeanRoebBargerZacharyMarksSponsoringMemberGlennBargerColemanHorowiLLPLaurenceYeeWongSponsoringMemberRobertRisbroughCollinsCollinsMuirSewarHowardFrancoCollinsworhSpechCalkinsScottD.CalkinsDanielsFineIsraelSchonbuchLebovisJaimeZagoriaDimalanaClarkLLPZubinFarinpourDoherCalowJohnDohertyDorseWhineLLPKentJ.SchmidtDowlingAaronIncorporaedDanielK.KlingenbergerMicahK.NilsonSponsoringMemberTomasFeherEngleCarobiniCoasDanielJ.CarobiniJennieA.HendricksonSponsoringMemberBenjaminCoatsEricksenArbuhnoPaulA.GreenSponsoringMemberMarkKieferFidoneMoookaMarjorieMotookaFordWalkerHaggerBeharAlexanderJ.BeharSponsoringMemberJereyS.BeharFredricksonMazeikaGranElliotHellerGreinesMarinSeinRichlandMeehanRaschBarbaraRavitzSponsoringMemberRobertOlsonHaighBrownBoneseelMaryBethSiposSponsoringMemberS.ChristianStouderHarringonFoxxDubrowCanerErikaN.BrennerDerekA.EarleyJuleeFritschMichaelJenkinsSponsoringMemberEdwardR.LeonardHiggsFlecherMackVirginiaL.PriceSponsoringMemberPeterDoodyIversonyoakumPapianoHachPatrickMcAdamJosephW.McCarhALawCorporaionJoeMcCarthyLaFolleeJohnsonDeHaasFeslerAmesMichaelE.BauerSaraGrecoTien.NguyenLennarCorp.KellyGivenJulieHolleyLorberGreeneldPolioLLPErinKennedyClancySponsoringMemberJoyiaZ.GreeneldLewisBrisboisBisgaardSmihDanielC.DeCarloTomasS.KiddSponsoringMemberDeborahSiriasManningKassEllrodRamireztreserLLPJohnnaJ.HansenJoshuaShayneSponsoringMemberLouPappasMarangaMorgensernSandorK.CarrascoPatriciaM.FordSponsoringMemberRobertMorgensternMcKadeLorimierArainNancyA.RamseySponsoringMemberPaulA.deLorimierMeneksheLawFirmCatherineAdamsMeredihWeinseinNumbersLLPCharlesH.NumbersMeersMcConnellReiszSidermanFrederickS.ReiszSponsoringMemberJohnW.McConnellIIINeilDmoFrankMcFalltrexlerSezenOygarSponsoringMemberClarkR.HudsonNewmeerDillionLeonardPolyakovSponsoringMemberMarkHimmelsteinOcesofAdrienneD.CohenDanielleM.DaltonemreL.FischerSponsoringMemberAdrienneD.CohenOcesofLarrKenLarryKentPalumboBergsromDavidS.MartucciKevin.MeadeRebackMcAndrewsKjarWarfordSockalperMooreLLPCindyShapiroSponsoringMemberPatrickStockalperRichardsonHarmanOberPCDennisAlthouseRobersonAssociaesAPCLesW.RobertsonRosenSabaLLPMomoE.akahashiRanMercaldoLLPJefreyP.CarvalhoNormanRyanAliciaM.ZimmermanSchumannRosenbergLLPKimSchumannSponsoringMemberChristopherFaenzaSlaugherReaganLLPMeganWinterSponsoringMemberWilliamSlaughterSpringelFinkRichardKotttalorBlesseLLPAnnaChungJordanR.GaskinsBrentLehmanBassilMadanatShannonWainwrightSponsoringMemberN.DeniseaylortresslerLLPMohammedS.MandegaryMaryE.McPhersonSponsoringMemberLindaB.MorrisonVarnerBrandBrendanW.BrandtAndrewRossWakinsLeofskLLPBrianLetoskyWaenDiscoeBasseMcMainsonyDiscoeKatieMaileyWaxlerCarnerBrodskLLPGretchenS.CarnerAndrewJ.WaxlerSponsoringMemberHarryChamberlainWilsonElserMoskowizEdelmanDickerPeterHughesKellyA.VanNortWingeSpadaforaSchwarzbergLLPBrandonS.ReiyokaSmihLaurenM.PisieczkoBrandonL.WymanSponsoringMemberWalterYoka Volume12013verdict7PatrickA.LongwhatwedoHewasntamemberoourassociation.NopeheneverjoinedASCDCbuthewasapparentlyoneheckoadeenseattorneyprimarilyrepresentingrailroads.Whileitwouldhavebeennicehadhejoinedourassociationhehadtwogoodreasonswhyhecouldnt.FirsthepracticedinIllinoisandsecondhepracticedahundredandtenyearsbeorethisassociationwasounded.YepAbeisarole-modelorallous.IntheinterestsoulldisclosureIwasborninSpringeldIllinoisandmyparentshousewaswithinwalkingdistanceoMr.Lincolnsgrave.IoccasionallyvisitedOakRidgeCemeteryandhavealwaysconsideredmyselsomethingoaLincolnreak.WhenInishedmytourasaDRIocertheygavemeknowingIhadastronginterestinMr.Lincolnasagoing-awaygiathirteenvolumebiographyoMr.Lincoln.TisbiographyisnevermentionedwhenbooksaboutLincolnarediscussedprimarilybecauseitwaspublishedin1894thatsright1894.WhereDRIoundthesethirteenvolumesIwillneverknow.TisisallbywayobackgroundtowhatIwantedtodiscusswithyou.TisyearsAcademyAwardsarenowlong-sincepassedbutInditremarkablehowmanyoourmembershipellinlovewiththelmLincolnandwereimpressedwiththeperormancesotheactorsinvolvedincludingDanielDay-LewisSallyFieldommyLeeJonesandalltheothers.ManyoourmembersstilldiscussthelmtodayalthoughitbeganitsgeneralreleaseinNovember2012.IcantrecallanotherrecentmoviethatstruckhometosomanyoourmembershipasdidLincoln.IwonderedwhyandnotgiventoshynessIasked.Manycolleaguesnotedwhattheyperceivedastheverycareulattentiontoperioddetailtherecreationoocesandlivingspaceslightinglimitedtothatprovidedbykeroseneoroillampsandreplacesperiodclothingparticularlyhatsetc.Othersspokeaboutphenomenalperormancesbytheactors.AlmosteveryonewithwhomIspokementionedthenescreenplaydealingwithMr.LincolnseortstoseethatCongresspassedthe13thAmendmenttotheConstitutionandtheconcernheeltthatitheCivilWarendedbeoreitspassagetheEmancipationProclamationo1863wouldbediscardedbythecourtsandslaveryreinstatedbythereturningSouthernstates.TetermIheardusedoverandoveraboutLincolnwasthatitwasrealistic.Nowthinkaboutit.Lincolnismostdenitelyaperiod-pieceanhistoricaldrama.GenerallyIsuspectthatmostothelmsweseewhichpurporttodepicteventshappeninginthepastsaymorethanyorsixtyyearsagoarenotusuallydescribedasrealistic.Moreoenthannotcareisnottakentocrabackdropsscenerydetailsevenmattersospeechthataccuratelyrefectwhatwewouldhaveseenandheardhadwebeenpresentinsuchtimespast.obespecicabouttheselapsesinrealismacoupleomonthsagoIsawalmwhichpurportedtodepicttheadventuresoagroupohighschoolstudentsinthelate1950s.ItwasanokayficknothingspecialbutwhatreallyputmeowaswhenoneleadingcharactersaidtoanotherHeydudeletsskipootballpracticetodayanddropbyLorettashouse.Icantruthullyclaimtohavebeenahighschoolstudentduringthelate1950sandIcanaccuratelyarmthattheonlyuseothetermdudeinthoseyearswastoidentiyamanlivinginthewesternUnitedStateswhowasnotamiliarwiththewayothecowboy.HearingthattermusedIsuddenlylostsomeotheenjoymentthatcomeswithwatchingaportrayalotimespast.Lincolnseemstohaveavoidedthiskindomistake.EssentiallyeveryonewithwhomIspokeseemedtoeelthatthelmtrulytookusbacktothattimetothatplace.TelocutionsusedthepoliticalissuestheamilialrelationshipsLincolnsstovepipemedicaldiscussionsallmadeuseelwewerethereintheroomasithappened.IjoinourmanycolleagueswhohaveseenthelminthanksgivingthattheentertainmentindustryoccasionallysendssomethinglikeLincolnourway.Lincolnisaremindertoustoconsidertheconceptotheruleolawthevagariesowarthedutiesolawyerstemptationstodishonestyandhowasinglemanohonorcanaectthecourseohistory.ImreasonablycertainthathadMr.LincolnlivedinSouthernCaliorniainthelasthalothe20thcenturyhewouldhavebeenamemberoourassociation.StovepipedeprivedPatrickA.Longpalongldlawyers.comInspirationFromaFlick 8verdictVolume12013 Volume12013verdict9thequarterinreview52ndSeminarLuncheonHighlightsByCarolShermanTheBiltmoreBowlbanquetroomwaselectriyingasASCDCmembersandPastPresidentsjudgesandguestsgatheredorthemuch-anticipatedFridayluncheon.TeluncheonhasbecomeanASCDCtraditioneaturingahighprolekeynotespeakerawardsandrecognitionbutmoreimportantlyitsthemomentwhentheleadershiproleotheAssociationispassedtotheincomingPresident.Te52ndluncheonopenedwiththeNationalAnthembeautiullysungbyStanordstudentCaitlinOlsondaughteroASCDCVicePresidentRobertOlson.IncomingPresidentDeniseaylorwelcomedeveryoneandacknowledgedtheBoardoDirectorsandCommitteeChairsaswellasthejudgesandPastPresidentsinattendance.ShethankedASCDCExecutiveDirectorJennierBlevinsandherstaortheireortsinmakingthiseventahugesuccess.InkeepingwithFridayluncheontraditionsPatLongPastPresidentoASCDCandtheDeenseResearchInstituteDRIpresentedDianeMarWiesmannwithDRIsPresidentsAwardoroutstandingservice.InalightheartedmomentLongpromisedWiesmannthattheplaquecommemoratingthehonorwouldarriveoncetheChicagoweatherpermitted.IncomingPresidentayloralsohonoredWiesmannwiththeawardingotheASCDCpresidentsplaqueorherdedicatedservicetotheAssociationandthelegalcommunity.IvehadthetimeomyliesaidWiesmann.Imveryproudothethingswedidthispastyear.TeFridayluncheonalsosawthestartoanewtraditiontheASCDCPresidentsAward.Tishonorisbestoweduponamemberwhohasgoneaboveandbeyondortheorganization.TerecipientotherstASCDCPresidentsAwardisLisaPerrocheteditoroVerdictmagazineandtheGreenSheetsthepopularinserthighlightingrecentdecisions.LisaisrecognizedorhersteadycommitmenttoqualityandoutreachnotedWiesmann.InhernaldutyasPresidentWiesmannintroducedincomingPresidentaylorbyhighlightingmanyoheraccomplishmentsspanninga30-yearlawcareer.urningtheprogramovertoaylorWiesmanncalledhercolleagueandriendAstellarattorneyandabrillianthumanbeing.aylorbeganherremarksbyaddressingtheyoungerattorneysintheaudience.Ivemadesomeomybestriendshipsthroughthisorganization.IhavebeensopersonallyupliedbyASCDCandithasbeensuchagoodthingormylawpractice.Sothoseoyououtthereparticularlyouryoungmemberspleasegetinvolvedandstayinvolved.Itcanonlyhelpyourlieandyourcareer.ShequicklyturnedherattentiontothechallengesaheadthiscomingyearinparticularthebudgetcutsimpactingtheCaliorniacourts.Tecourtshavebeenhitverybadly.Teresalreadybeen105millionincuts.Becauseothatcourthousesandcourtroomsthroughoutthestatehavebeenclosed.ShenotedLosAngelesCountywhereattorneysnowmustprovidecourtreportersaservicepreviouslyprovidedbythecourts.Shenotedthatthecourtsareacingadditionalcutsthisyearandimplementingdrasticmeasurestostayafoat.OnesuchmeasureisaplantoconsolidateLosAngelesCountypersonalinjuryPIcasesintoasingledowntowndepartmentwiththreecourtroomsandvejudges.AllcasespendingwillbetranserreddowntowntoPIcourtstartingearlynextmonth.Shenotedthatmorecomplexcasesmightbetheexception.Nooneisgoingtobepushingustotrial.Whenacaseisreadyortrialitwillbeshippedouttooneo31dedicatedtrialcourts.Delaysareinevitable.Sheencouragedmemberstobepatientwiththecourtanditsstaduringthetransitionperiod.ShealsotalkedabouttheeortsolobbyistMikeBeloteandCaliorniaDeenseCounselCDCwhohavebeenworkingdiligentlywithmembersotheLegislatureandtheChieJusticeonissuesimportanttothecivildeensepractice.OurAmicusCommitteeisthehardestworkingcommitteeshesaid.Lastyeartheyparticipatedin12successulappealsineithergettingopinionspublishedorde-published.IyouhaveanissuethatyouwouldlikeourorganizationtohelpyouwithbysendingaletterorAmicusbrieletusknow.ShewentontoannouncetherecipientsotheupcomingHalloFamedinnerandawardsceremonyplannedorJune20attheMillenniumBiltmoreHotel.TisyearsrecipientsincludeRobertBakerASCDCpastPresident1989.SheconcludedbyannouncingASCDCsbusyseminarscheduleortheyearandencouragedeveryonetoparticipate. 10verdictVolume12013 GOPStrategistKarlRoveAddressesthe52ndAnnualSeminarByCarolShermanVolume12013verdict11continuedonpage12RoveservedasPresidentBushsSeniorAdvisorandDeputyChieoStafandcoordinatedtheWhiteHousepolicy-makingprocess.SinceleavingtheWhiteHousetheoutspokenconservativeandGOPstrategistisaFoxNewscontributorWallStreetJournalcolumnistandbestsellingauthor.SpeakingbeoreapackedballroomRovemadelightathavinghisnameaddedtothelongandillustriouslistopastluncheonspeakersincludingormerU.S.presidentsworldleadersnotedpoliticiansandmostrecentlyhispoliticalsparringpartnerandgoodriendJamesCarville.HejokedAerallothosespeakershowdidyougettoCarvilleandRoveurninghisremarkstothepresent-daygridlockandnger-pointingbetweentheWhiteHouseandCongresshelashedoutatthecurrentadministrationsleadershipovertheederalbudgetcrisisandeconomicrecovery.WashingtonD.C.isthesmallesttownyouveeverseenintheworldanditsacompanytown.Itsbusinessispolitics.Butoccasionallyyouneedtoputitasideandgetthingsdone.Andthecountryneedstogetthingsdone.Tecountryisnotgrowingatthepaceitneedstogrow.KarlRovetheArchitectoPresidentGeorgeW.Bushs2000and2004campaignsdeliveredthekeynoteaddressatthe52ndAnnualSeminarheldattheMillenniumBiltmoreHotelinLosAngelesonMarch12013.AlwayscandidRovesharedhiskeenandoenprovocativeinsightsintothepoliticalbattlesbeingwagedovergovernmentspendingthenationaldecitentitlementprogramsandeconomicgrowththatwillprovidejobsAmericanswantandneed. 12verdictVolume12013KarlRovecontinuedfrompage11continuedonpage13Hecalledthepartisandebatesoversequestrationtheautomaticacross-the-boardcutstogovernmentagenciesinaneorttocontrolgrowthotheU.S.nationaldebtapoliticalootballusedorthepurposesoscaringpeople.Hepointedoutthatevenwiththecutsthisyearsbudgetwillstillbebiggerthanlastyearsbudget.TisisnotagoodwaytoruntheU.S.government.Teimpactothishasbeenoverplayed.HepointedtoanotherbattleonthehorizonbetweentheWhiteHouseandCongressoveraproposedadditiontoaRepublican-supportedresolutiontoundthegovernmentthroughtheendothescalyear.TisadditionwouldgivetheSecretaryoDeensefexibilitytoavoidacross-the-boardcutsandmakecutsonamorethoughtulbasis.IhopetheDemocratsaresmartandsayOkaywelltakethatfexibilityortheDepartmentoDeenseaslongasyougiveusfexibilityonthedomesticside.EitherwayhenotedthegovernmenthastobeundedbytheendoMarchmakingittheourthyearinarowtheederalgovernmenthasbeenwithoutanannualbudget.WevebeenrunningthegovernmentonaseriesoresolutionsandyetwestillexpectthemenandwomentorunthesedepartmentsandtomakecriticaldecisionsnotwithHeresaplanorthenextyearbutHereshowmuchmoneyyouhaveorthenextmonthortwo.Itsnotthewaytorunagovernment.Wevebeendoingitorouryears.Hesaidthatthesebudgetbattlesobscurethelargerissuesacingthecountry.Wehaveadeepdivideinourleadershipoverwhatourproblemis.IsourproblemaspendingproblemorisitarevenueproblemHeaddedDowespendandtaxourwayoutoitordoweactuallydowhatamiliesandbusinesseshavedoneandthatisputtheirscalhouseinorder.AnumbersguyhesharedthestaggeringcosttoeachAmericanothegrowingnationaldecit.AccordingtoRoveinJanuary2009thedecitotheU.S.amountedto34782pereveryAmericanandhassincerisentoover54200oreveryAmerican.urningtoSocialSecurityretirementandMedicarecostsincreasingwiththeadditionotensothousandsoretiringbaby-boomerstotheseentitlementprogramseverydayhesaidTesesystemsareunsustainable.HecitedabipartisanreportstatingthatSocialSecurityretirementwillrunoutoundsin2037.OncethatoccursalawgoesintoeectthatreducestheaverageAmericansSocialSecuritypaymentby25.Medicarehealthcarehasnoback-uplegislationtocontinuetopayhealthcarebenetsitheprogramrunsoutomoney.Weredoingnothingaboutthis.RovealsolashedoutatwhatheconsideredtobeagrossunderestimationothecostotheAordableCareActsignedintolawbyPresidentObama.Tisisahugeentitlementnowonthebooksthatsgoingtocomecrashingdownonuswithinthedecade.ourthermakeacaseorthelackoocusingovernmentleadershipRovebelievedthesloweconomyandlackojobsarethebiggestproblemsacingtheAmericanpeople.Wereinarecovery.SinceJune2009theeconomyhasbeengrowinganaverageo1.9ayear.IusedtosayitstheweakestrecoverysinceWorldWarII.NowhearguedthatarespectedeconomisthascalledittheweakestrecoveryinrecordedAmericanhistorystretchingbackover100years.Itsalsotherstrecoveryinmodernhistoryinwhichmediumamilyincomehasdeclined.Inrecoveriesweallstarttogetuponoureet.InJanuary2009beoretherecoverybeganinJunemedianamilyincomeinAmericawas51190.AsolastDecemberseveralyearsintotherecoverymedianhouseholdincomewas50054.Tishasneverhappenedbeore.Wereanoptimisticcountry.Whenwegetupandgetgoingeverybodytendstorise.Butnotthistime.Hepointedthengeratthelackojobsormuchotheeconomictroubles.AtthecurrentrateojobcreationitwilltakeusuntilJulyonextyeartogetbacktothesamenumberopeopleworkinginAmericathatwehadwhenwewentintotherecessioninDecembero2007.Henotedthatinthemeantimethereareupwardsoeightmillionpeopleenteringthejobmarketincludingcollegeandhighschoolgraduatesorparents Volume12013verdict13re-enteringtheworkorceaerraisingaamily.Lastyearwecreated12000manuacturingjobsamonthonaverage.DoyouknowhowlongtogetbacktowherewewereinDecember2007ItsonlygoingtotakeusuntilDecember2024.WhathappenedWerestillmanuacturingalotothings.PeoplearesayingRatherthanhiringsomeoneletmebuyarobot.Letmeautomatemysystemletmeoutsourceit.Letmedosomethingdiferentthatletsmebeeconomicallycompetitive.Healsopointedtoconstructionjobnumbers.AtthecurrentlevelitwilltakeusuntilDecember2030togetbacktothesamelevelopeopleworkinginconstructionasDecember2007.Tisissimplyinsucientoragreatcountrylikeours.Tisisacountrythatpromisesopportunitytopeopleandletspeopleriseromnothingtogreatnessbybeingadynamiceconomythatprovidedopportunity.Iyouwantedtoworkhardandthinkbigthisistheplacetobe.InconclusionhesaidGenerallyImanoptimistickindoguybutImnotsurehowwegetoutothisunlesswehaveachangeinWashington.Itsgoingtotakesomethingbigtogetoutoit.Wewillgetoutoitthough.Wecontinuallyscrewitupuntilthelastminute.Wendsomewaytolooklikeidiotsandthenpullitout.IguessthatspartotheAmericanpsyche.KarlRovecontinuedfrompage12 14verdictVolume12013ASCDCTanksOur2013AnnualSeminarExhibitorsandSponsorsABIDocumentSupportServicesADRServicesInc.ARCDisputeResolutionCompexLegalServicesInc.ESIExamWorksExecutivePresentationsExponentEZSubpoenaForensisGroupInc.HSNOIveyEngineeringInc.JAMSTeResolutionExpertsJudicateWestKnoxAttorneyServicesLibertyMed-LegalAdmin.Inc.Macro-ProInc.MaxeneWeinbergAgencyPetersonReportingPMADisputeResolutionQuestDiscoveryServicesInc.RoughanAssociatesSecondImageNationalInc.SteinInvestigationAgencyExhibitorsSponsorsExecutivePresentationsEZSubpoenaForensisGroupInc.KnoxServicesLLCPatfarber.com Volume12013verdict152013AnnualSeminarPhotos 16verdictVolume12013 Volume12013verdict17INtRODuCtIONTegeneralruleincivilcasesisthateachpartymustpayorhisownattorneysees.UndertheAmericanruleasageneralpropositioneachpartymustpayhisorherownattorneyees.Tisconceptisembodiedinsection1021otheCodeoCivilProcedurewhichprovidesthateachpartyistobearhisownattorneyeesunlessastatuteortheagreementothepartiesprovidesotherwise.Grayv.DonMillerAssociatesInc.198435Cal.3d498504.Nonethelessthisruleisriddledwithexceptionswithdozensostatutesspecicallyprovidingthatjudgesmayrequireonesidetopaytheothersattorneyees.Seee.g.Civ.Code55CaliorniasDisabledPersonsAct1942.4subd.blandlordsbreachowarrantyohabitability3496speciednuisancecasesCodeoCiv.Proc.425.16subd.c425.18subd.anti-SLAPP.Tepotentialtorecovereesisnosmallmatter.Inmanysituationstheamountoattorneyeesspentonacasewilleasilydwartheamountothejudgment.OneothemostcommonattorneyeestatutesthatarisesinlitigationistheonethatpermitsacourttoawardeespursuanttothepartiescontractsCivilCodesection1717.Tisprovisionprovidesoranawardoattorneyeesinavorothepartyprevailingonthecontractwhetherheorsheisthepartyspeciedinthecontractornot.Civ.Code1717subd.b.Tecourtwillawardeesunderthisprovisiontothepartywhorecoveredthegreaterrelieintheactiononthecontract.Ibid.Alasthedevilisinthedetails.oobtainanawardoattorneyeeswhetherunderCivilCodesection1717orotherprovisionsitisnotenoughtoprevailintheunderlyinglitigationthepartymustconvincethejudgetoawardtheees.Ocoursedocumentingthehoursspentdeendingthecaseusingalodestarmethodandprovidingthejudgeacompleterecordarecriticallyimportant.SeeMeisterv.RegentsofUniv.ofCal.199867Cal.App.4th437448-449.Tisarticlewillocusonthejudgesauthoritytodenyanawardoattorneyeesaltogetherwhenapartysubmitsanunreasonablyinfatedclaim.TisauthorityderivesromtheCaliorniaSupremeCourtsopinioninSerranov.Unruh198232Cal.3d621635SerranoIVandalthoughtherearenopublishedappellatecasesonthetopicshouldbeapplicabletoattorneyeerequestsmadeunderCivilCodesection1717.tHEPOWERtODENyINFLAtEDCLAIMSIncontextsotherthanCivilCodesection1717ithasbeenheldthateventhoughalitigantincurredattorneyeesthejudgehaspowertoawardnoeesbecausetheeerequestwasunreasonablyinfated.AjudgespowertodenyanawardbasedonaninfatedeerequestwasrstsetorthinthisstatebytheCaliorniaSupremeCourtinSerranoIV.TeSupremeCourtinSerranoIVconsideredacourtspowertoawardattorneyeesunderCaliorniasPrivateAttorneyGeneralstatuteinCodeoCivilProceduresection1021.5.TisstatuteprovidesthatwhenapartyslitigationhasconerredasignicantbenetonthegeneralpublicandothercriteriaaresatisedUponmotionacourtmayawardattorneyseestoasuccessulpartyagainstoneormoreopposingpartiesinanyactionwhichhasresultedintheenorcementoanimportantrightaectingthepublicinterest....CodeCiv.Proc.1021.5.Serranov.Priest197720Cal.3d2550hadpreviouslyremandedthecaseorthetrialcourttodeterminetheamountoattorneyeesrecoverableunderthissectionorlitigationinvolvinganequalprotectionchallengetothenancingopublicschools.SerranoIVreviewedthetrialcourtsrulingregardingwhetherapartycouldbecompensatedorattorneyeesincurredinlitigatingtheunderlyingattorneyeerequest.SerranoIVheldthatpartiesareentitledtocompensationorallhoursreasonablyspentbytheirattorneysincludingthoseincurredinlitigatinganattorneyeerequest.SerranoIVsupra32Cal.3datpp.632-633.JudgesPowertoDenyInatedAttorneyFeeRequestsInCodeofCivilProcedureSection1717CasesHon.AlexRicciardullicontinuedonpage18 18verdictVolume12013SerranoIVcautionedhoweverthataulleeawardmaynotbeappropriatewhenspecialcircumstanceswouldrendersuchanawardunjust.SerranoIVsupra32Cal.3datp.633quotingNewmanv.PiggieParkEnterprises1968390U.S.400402.TeCourtreasonedthattheabilitytoseekattorneyeesdoesnotlicenseprevailingpartiestoorcetheiropponentstoaHobsonschoiceoaccedingtoexorbitanteedemandsorincurringurtherexpensebyvoicinglegitimateobjections.SerranoIVsupra32Cal.3datp.635.SerranoIVdeterminedthatacourtshouldhavetheabilitytocurbsuchexcessesAeerequestthatappearsunreasonablyinfatedisaspecialcircumstancepermittingthetrialcourttoreducetheawardordenyonealtogether.Ibid.TerationaleorajudgespowerinthissituationwasaptlyarticulatedbytheCaliorniaSupremeCourtI...theCourtwererequiredtoawardareasonableeewhenanoutrageouslyunreasonableonehasbeenaskedorclaimantswouldbeencouragedtomakeunreasonabledemandsknowingthattheonlyunavorableconsequenceosuchmisconductwouldbereductionotheireetowhattheyshouldhaveaskedintherstplace.odiscouragesuchgreedasevererreactionisneedul.SerranoIVsupra32Cal.3d621635quotingBrownv.Stackler7thCir.1980612F.2d10571059.SerranoIVsspecialcircumstanceauthorizingthetotaldenialoanattorneyeerequestduetoaninfatedclaimhasbeencitedwithapprovalincasesapplyingvariousCaliorniaattorneyeesprovisions.SeeChavezv.CityofLosAngeles201047Cal.4th970990-991Gov.Code12965subd.bCaliorniaFairEmploymentandHousingActattorneyeeclaimKetchumv.Moses200124Cal.4th11221137CodeoCiv.Proc.425.16subd.c1Anti-SLAPPattorneyeeprovisionChristianResearchInstitutev.Alnor2008165Cal.App.4th13151329sameMeisterv.RegentsofUniversityofCaliforniasupra67Cal.App.4thatp.455Civ.Code1798.46subd.battorneyeeprovisionrelatingtocauseoactionagainstapublicagencyorpublicdisclosureopersonalinormationPeopleexrel.Cooperv.MitchellBrothersSantaAnaTeater1995165Cal.App.3d378388Civ.Code3496attorneyeeprovisionduetoimpropergovernmentactionrelatingtopornographicmaterials.CIVILCODESECtION1717WhenacontractbetweenpartiesspeciesthatattorneyeescanbeawardedtoaprevailingpartyinanactiononthecontractapartycanseekrecoveryotheeeseitherascostsunderCivilCodesection1717orasdamagesunderthecontract.M.C.D.CapitalCorp.v.Gilmaker1988204Cal.App.3d671676BenecialStandardPropertiesInc.v.Scharps197767Cal.App.3d227231-232.CivilCodesection1717subdivisionaprovidesthatInanyactiononacontractwherethecontractspecicallyprovidesthatattorneyseesandcostswhichareincurredtoenorcethatcontractshallbeawardedeithertooneothepartiesortotheprevailingpartythenthepartywhoisdeterminedtobethepartyprevailingonthecontractwhetherheorsheisthepartyspeciedinthecontractornotshallbeentitledtoreasonableattorneyseesinadditiontoothercosts.AjudgehasbroaddiscretionindeterminingthereasonablenessotheattorneyeestobeawardedunderCivilCodesection1717.hecourtconsiderssuchactorsasthenatureothelitigationthedicultyothelitigationtheamountomoneyinvolvedtheleveloskillrequiredandemployedinthehandlingothelitigationtheattentiongiventotheissuesthesuccessotheattorneyseortsandtimeconsumed.PLCMGroupInc.v.Drexler199872Cal.App.4th693708citingClaytonDevelopmentCo.v.Falvey1988206Cal.App.3d438447.JuDGESPOWERINCIVILCODESECtION1717CASESLitigantssometimesarguethatonceajudgehasdeterminedthatapartyisaprevailingpartyinaCivilCodesection1717attorneyeeclaimthatjudgehasnodiscretiontoreusetomakeanaward.Terearecasesthatsupportthiscontention.ForexampleSilverCreekLLCv.BlackRockRealtyAdvisorsInc.2009173Cal.App.4th15331538statedWhenapartyobtainsasimpleunqualiedwinbycompletelyprevailingonordeeatingthecontractclaimsintheactionandthecontractcontainsaprovisionorattorneyeesthesuccessulpartyisentitledtoattorneyeesasamatterorighteliminatingthetrialcourtsdiscretiontodenyeesundersection1717.Citation.TeCourtoAppealinthatcasereliedonHsuv.Abbara19959Cal.4th863876whichheldthatwhenapartythathasobtainedanunqualiedvictoryTetrialcourthasnodiscretiontodenyattorneyeestothedeendant....Howeverthesecasesdonotdealwithinfatedeerequests.Hsuv.Abbarasupra9Cal.4th863876merelyoundthatthetrialcourtabuseditsdiscretioninreusingtomakeanawardbyndingthattherewasnopartyprevailingonthecontract.TesamesituationexistedinSilverCreekLLCv.BlackRockRealtyAdvisorsInc.supra173Cal.App.4th15331538wheretheCourtoAppealoundthattherewasaclearprevailingpartyandthereorethetrialcourtabuseditsdiscretionbydeterminingthattherewasnoprevailingparty.OthercaseswhichhaveoundthatacourthasnodiscretiontoreusetomakeanawardinCivilCodesection1717attorneyeerequestshavealsonotdealtwithinfatedeerequests.Seee.g.exasCommerceBankv.Garamendi199428Cal.App.4th12341247DeaneGardenhomeAssn.v.Denktas199313Cal.App.4th13941388-1399.Opinionsarenotauthorityorpropositionsnotconsidered.Ginnsv.Savage196461Cal.2d520524n.2.TeredoesnotappeartobeanyvalidreasontonotapplySerranoIVsspecialcircumstanceininfatedattorneyeesituationstoCivilCodesection1717requests.PrevailingcounselareentitledtocompensationorallhoursreasonablyspentunlessspecialcircumstanceswouldrenderanawardunjustCitations.MBNAAmericaBankN.A.v.Gorman2006147Cal.App.4thSupp.112.Filinganinfatedclaimisaspecialcircumstanceallowingacourttodenyitaltogether.continuedonpage19AttorneyFeescontinuedfrompage17 Volume12013verdict19TeattorneyeeprovisioninSerranoIVprovidedthatacourtmayawardattorneyseestoasuccessulpartyCodeCiv.Proc.1021.5emphasisaddedwhereasCivilCodesection1717subdivisionastatesthattheprevailingpartyshallbeentitledtoreasonableattorneyseesemphasisadded.Nonethelesstheauthoritytoreusetomakeanawardinaninfatedeesituationisnotdependentonthelanguageothestatuteathand.ForexamplewhiletheAnti-SLAPPstatuteCodeoCivilProceduresection425.16subdivisionc1statesapartyshallbeentitledtorecoverhisorherattorneyseesemphasisaddedcourtshavecitedSerranoIVsspecialcircumstancewithapproval.Ketchumv.Mosessupra24Cal.4th11221137ChristianResearchInstitutev.Alnor165Cal.App.4th13151329.TesameistrueregardingtheattorneyeestatuterelatingtoacauseoactionagainstapublicagencyorpublicdisclosureopersonalinormationinCivilCodesection1798.46subdivisionbwhichstatesthatTecourtshallassessagainsttheagencyreasonableattorneyseesemphasisadded.Meisterv.RegentsofUniversityofCaliforniasupra67Cal.App.4th437455.CivilCodesection1717wasmeanttopreventoppressiveuseoone-sidedattorneyseesprovisionsCitation.nottoabolishthegeneralrulethateachpartypayitsownattorneyees.DiamondHeightsVillageAssn.Inc.v.FinancialFreedomSeniorFundingCorp.2011196Cal.App.4th290308.CivilCodesection1717refectsageneralpolicytopreventone-sidedattorneyeeprovisions.Tusitpromotescertaintyandpreventsoverreachingbothinthenegotiationoacontractandintheuseothecourtsduringlitigation.ABFCapitalCorp.v.GrovePropertiesCo.2005126Cal.App.4th204218.TesegoalswouldbeurtheredbygivingjudgespowertodenyinfatedclaimsinCivilCodesection1717cases.CONCLuSIONTespecialcircumstancerulewasintendedtodetergreedanddissuadeattorneysrommakingunreasonableeedemands.WithoutthepotentialthreatoajudgedenyingeesaltogetherunscrupulousattorneyswouldhavestrongincentivetoclaimsubstantiallyinfatedeesinanyCivilCodesection1717case.Evenitherewasonlyaremotechanceajudgewouldawardtheinfatedeeclaimattorneyswouldhavenothingtolosebyclaiminganunjustiedgureandthereorehavenodisincentivetomakeoutrageousclaims.TiswouldbetheverytypeobehaviorSerranoIVattemptedtodeterandwouldmeananincreasedburdenoncourtsandopposingparties.ApplyingthespecialcircumstanceruletoCivilCodesection1717claimswouldnotcontravenetheintentionsotheCaliorniaLegislatureinenactingthestatuteanditwouldurtherthestatedpurposeothespecialcircumstanceruleinSerranoIV.Hon.AlexRicciardulliisajudgeintheLosAngelesCountySuperiorCourtassignedtothecourtsAppellateDivision.Heisco-authorofCaliforniaCriminalLawTeCALCRIMHandbookandCaliorniaCriminalMotionsWest2012andrunstheDailyJournalandCenterforJudicialEducationandResearchsMCLEandJudicialEducationArticlesSeries.AttorneyFeescontinuedfrompage18 20verdictVolume12013LIFECAREPLANSIComprehensiveTrialIMiniMediationSettlementConferenceICritiqueEXPERTTESTIMONYITrialIArbitrationIMediationSettlementConferenceVIDEOSERVICEIDayinLifeIMediationSettlementDocumentaryMEDICALRECORDSIReviewIChronologyIMEIAttendanceIReportCritique114WestColoradoBlvd.MonroviaCA91016626.303.6333Ext.16or17www.linc.bizJanRoughanRNLIFECAREPLANNING Volume12013verdictgreensheetsiLaPrrhTheGreenSheetsalthoughpublishedlaterthanmostcurrentadvancesheetsbecauseocopydeadlinesshouldserveasauseulrevieworecentimportantdecisions.ReadersareinvitedtosuggestsignicantdecisionsorinclusioninthenextGreenSheetsedition.PleasecontactLPerrochethorvitzlevy.comomaketheGreenSheetsauseultooltodeensecounseltheyareprintedingreenandinsertedinthemiddleoVerdictmagazineeachissue.Teycanbeeasilyremovedandledorurtherreerence.OcoursetheGreenSheetsarealwaysoneattorneysinterpretationothecaseandeachattorneyshouldthoroughlyreadthecasesbeorecitingthemorrelyingonthisdigest.Careulcounselwillalsochecksubsequenthistorybeoreciting.grnhNotesoNReceNtDecisioNsnnudnpagciViLPRoceDUReDrnfnnuuarualapplUcLauflman.Aryehv.CanonBusinessSolutionsInc.201355Cal.4th1185InthisactionundertheUnairCompetitionLawUCLBusinessandProessionsCodesection17200etseq.plaintifclaimedthatdeendantCanonchargedexcessiveamountsorphotocopiesonleasedmachines.Tispracticeallegedlyoccurredoveraperiodoyears.TepartiesdisputedwhenthestatuteolimitationsaccruedandwhetheritexpiredbeoreAryehledthisaction.LowerappellatecourtshadsplitregardingtheoperationotheUCLs4-yearstatuteolimitationsincasesinvolvingacontinuingcourseoconductandsomedecisionshadheldthatequitableexceptionstothenormalaccrualrulesdonotapplyintheUCLcontext.TeCaliorniaSupremeCourtheldthatUCLactionsaresubjecttothesameaccrualandequitableexceptionrulesgoverningcommonlawclaims.TusequitabledoctrinessuchasdelayeddiscoverycontinuingviolationsandcontinuousaccrualareapplicabletoUCLactionstothesameextentthattheywouldapplyinothercases.ApplyingitsholdingtotheactsothiscasethecourtheldthattheplaintifAryehsUCLclaimsurvivedinpartunderthecontinuousaccrualdoctrinewhichprovidesthatwhenanobligationorliabilityarisesonarecurringbasisacauseoactionaccrueseachtimeawrongulactoccurstriggeringanewlimitationsperiod.TuseachinstancewhereCanonallegedlychargedAryehorexcesscopiesconstitutedanindependentUCLviolationwithitsown4-yearlimitationsperiod.AryehwasallowedtoseekrestitutionorexcesscopychargesCanonimposedwithin4yearsbeorethelingoAryehsoriginalcomplaint.Dnalfanan-sLAPPmnnfdralurubjnrluryappal.DCComicsv.PacifcPicturesCorp.etal.9thCir.Jan.102013No.11-56934F.3d2013WL120807InthisactionarisingoutothetranserointellectualpropertyrightsinvolvingthecharacterSupermanplaintifDCComicssueddeendantsoravarietyostateandederalclaimsincludingintentionalintererencewithcontractualrelationsandprospectiveeconomicadvantageaswellasviolationoCaliorniasunaircompetitionlawUCL.DeendantsmovedtostrikeDCsintentionalintererenceandunaircompetitionclaimspursuanttoCaliorniasanti-SLAPPstatuteCal.Civ.Proc.Code425.16.TedistrictjudgedeniedthemotionholdingthatdeendantshadailedtoshowthatanyoDCsclaimsaroseromconductallingwithintheprotectionotheanti-SLAPPstatute.Tedeendantledaninterlocutoryappeal.Te9thCircuitruledthatithadjurisdictiontoheartheappealconsistentwithitsearlieropinioninBatzelv.Smith333F.3d10189thCir.2003whichhelddenialoamotionbroughtinederalcourtunderCaliorniasanti-SLAPPstatuteissubjecttointerlocutoryappellatereviewasacollateralorder.TecourtconcludedthatholdingwasstillvaliddespitetherulingsixyearslaterbyUnitedStatesSupremeCourtinMohawkIndustriesv.Carpenter2009130S.Ct.599.Terethehighcourtlimitedthescopeocollateralorderreviewholdingthatorderstoproducepotentiallyprivilegeddocumentsarenolongersubjecttointerlocutoryappellatereviewascollateralorders.InDCComicsVoume12013erictgreenseetsiLaPrrhTheGreenSheetsalthoughpublishedlaterthanmostcurrentadvancesheetsbecauseocopydeadlinesshouldserveasauseulrevieworecentimportantdecisions.ReadersareinvitedtosuggestsignicantdecisionsorinclusioninthenextGreenSheetsedition.PleasecontactLPerrochethorvitzlevy.comomaketheGreenSheetsauseultooltodeensecounseltheyareprintedingreenandinsertedinthemiddleoVerdicmagazineeachissue.Teycanbeeasilyremovedandledorurtherreerence.OcoursetheGreenSheetsarealwaysoneattorneysinterpretationothecaseandeachattorneyshouldthorouhlyreadthecasesbeorecitinthemorrelyinonthisdiest.Careulcounselwillalsochecksubsequenthistorybeorecitin.rnhNotesoNReceNtDecisioNsnnudnpagciViLPRoceDUReDrnfnnuuarualapplUcLauflman.Aryehv.CanonBusinessSolutionsInc.201355Cal.4th1185InthisactionundertheUnairCompetitionLawUCLBusinessandProessionsCodesection17200etseq.plaintifclaimedthatdeendantCanonchargedexcessiveamountsorphotocopiesonleasedmachines.Tispracticeallegedlyoccurredoveraperiodoyears.TepartiesdisputedwhenthestatuteolimitationsaccruedandwhetheritexpiredbeoreAryehledthisaction.LowerappellatecourtshadsplitregardingtheoperationotheUCLs4-yearstatuteolimitationsincasesinvolvingacontinuingcourseoconductandsomedecisionshadheldthatequitableexceptionstothenormalaccrualrulesdonotapplyintheUCLcontext.TeCaliorniaSupremeCourtheldthatUCLactionsaresubjecttothesameaccrualandequitableexceptionrulesgoverningcommonlawclaims.TusequitabledoctrinessuchasdelayeddiscoverycontinuingviolationsandcontinuousaccrualareapplicabletoUCLactionstothesameextentthattheywouldapplyinothercases.ApplyingitsholdingtotheactsothiscasethecourtheldthattheplaintiAryehsUCLclaimsurvivedinpartunderthecontinuousaccrualdoctrinewhichprovidesthatwhenanobligationorliabilityarisesonarecurringbasisacauseoactionaccrueseachtimeawrongulactoccurstriggeringanewlimitationsperiod.TuseachinstancewhereCanonallegedlychargedAryehorexcesscopiesconstitutedanindependentUCLviolationwithitsown4-yearlimitationsperiod.AryehwasallowedtoseekrestitutionorexcesscopychargesCanonimposedwithin4yearsbeorethelingoAryehsoriginalcomplaint.Dnalfanan-sLAPPmnnfdralurubjnrluryappal.DCComicsv.PacifcPicturesCorp.etal.9thCir.Jan.102013No.11-56934F.3d2013WL120807InthisactionarisingoutothetranserointellectualpropertyrightsinvolvingthecharacterSupermanplaintifDCComicssueddeendantsoravarietyostateandederalclaimsincludingintentionalintererencewithcontractualrelationsandprospectiveeconomicadvantageaswellasviolationoCaliorniasunaircompetitionlawUCL.DeendantsmovedtostrikeDCsintentionalintererenceandunaircompetitionclaimspursuanttoCaliorniasanti-SLAPPstatuteCal.Civ.Proc.Code425.16.TedistrictjudedeniedthemotionholdinthatdeendantshadailedtoshowthatanyoDCsclaimsaroseromconductallinwithintheprotectionotheanti-SLAPPstatute.Tedeendantledaninterlocutoryappeal.Te9thCircuitruledthatithadjurisdictiontoheartheappealconsistentwithitsearlieropinioninBatzelv.Smith333F.3d10189thCir.2003whichhelddenialoamotionbrouhtinederalcourtunderCaliorniasanti-SLAPPstatuteissubjecttointerlocutoryappellatereviewasacollateralorder.TecourtconcludedthatholdinwasstillvaliddespitetherulinsixyearslaterbyUnitedStatesSupremeCourtinMohawkIndustriesv.Carpente2009130S.Ct.599.Terethehihcourtlimitedthescopeocollateralorderreviewholdinthatorderstoproducepotentiallyprivileeddocumentsarenolonersubjecttointerlocutoryappellatereviewascollateralorders.InDCComics iiverdictgreensheetsVolume12013theNinthCircuitobservedthatanti-SLAPPordersaremateriallydierentromorderstoproduceprivilegeddocumentsorpurposesothecollateralorderdoctrine.TiscaseservesasanimportantreminderthatlitigantscantakeadvantageoCaliorniasanti-SLAPPstatutetodeeatstate-lawclaimsbroughtinederalcourtandseekimmediateinterlocutoryappellatereviewithemotionisdenied.CompareNunag-Tanedov.EastBatonRougeParishSchoolBoard9thCir711F.3d11369thCir.CourtoAppealshadnojurisdictionviainterlocutoryappealtoreviewdenialoamotiontodismissederalcourtactionongroundsoimmunityundertheNoerr-PenningtondoctrinewhichbarsactionsbasedonconductprotectedbytheFirstAmendmentrighttopetitionorredressogrievancesunlikeanti-SLAPPdismissalsadismissalundertheNoerr-Penningtondoctrineisnotappealableunderthecollateralorderdoctrinenorwasitreviewableunderpendentappellatejurisdictionwhereanappealromananti-SLAPPorderhasbeenled.complaintbypropertyowneralleginglanderandtradelibelwaubjettodimialundertheanti-sLAPPbutro-omplaintbaedonallegedlyfaleauationofriminalativitywanot.CityofCostaMesav.DAlessioInvestmentsLLC2013214Cal.App.4th358PetitionforReviewled041913caseno.S210098InthisnuisanceabatementactionacommercialpropertyownerwassuedbytheCityoCostaMesaandcross-complainedtoassertclaimsthatcityemployeesunlawullytoldpotentialbusinesstenantstheywouldnotbeabletoobtainlicensestoperormbusinessactivitiesatthepropertybecauseocriminalactivitybythecross-complainant.Tecitymovedtodismisstheactiononthegrounditimplicatedreespeechrightsinconnectionwithpendingpublicjudicialandregulatoryproceedingsandthusmustbedismissedundertheanti-SLAPPstatute.Tetrialcourtpartiallygrantedandpartiallydeniedthemotion.TeCourtoAppealFourthDist.Div.Treereversedinpartholdingthetrialcourtwasrequiredtodismissmoreotheactionthanithaddismissedundertheanti-SLAPPmotion.Tecourtshouldhavegrantedthemotionastocertaincross-deendantswherethecross-complainantsailedtooerevidenceromwhichatrieroactcouldndthosecross-deendantshadmadealsestatements.Howeverthecourtafrmedthetrialcourtsdenialotheanti-SLAPPmotionastocross-deendantswhosomeevidenceindicatedhadalselyaccusedcross-complainantohavingacriminalrecordinastatementthatwasnotprotectedbythelitigationprivilegeorpublicentityimmunities.SeealsoHawranv.Hixson2012209Cal.App.4th256FourthDist.Div.1inactionarisingoutodeendantsallegedlydeamatorypressreleaseaboutplaintiandhiscorporationthetrialcourtproperlydeniedthedeendantsanti-SLAPPmotiontodismisscausesoactionordeamationinvasionoprivacyunairbusinesspracticesaswellasbreachocontractastothecorporationbecausetheplaintiproeredevidenceromwhichatrieroactcouldndmeritinhisclaimsanddeendantsdidnotshowthepressreleasewassufcientlytiedtoanSECinvestigationastobeprotectedbytheairreportingprivilegequaliedcommoninterestprivilegeorlitigationprivilege.Howeverthecourtproperlygrantedtheanti-SLAPPmotiontobarplaintisclaimsorintererencewithprospectiveeconomicadvantageandmisrepresentationaswellasbreachocontractastotheindividualdeendantsbecausethosecausesoactionaroseromawritinginconnectionwithanofcialproceedingandtheplaintisactionsdidnotallwithinthecommercialspeechexemptionromtheanti-SLAPPstatutebecausetherepresentationsmadewerenotrelatedtothecompanysbusinessoperationsSeealsoVivianv.Labrucherie2013214Cal.App.4th267FirstDist.Div.3trialcourterroneouslydeniedanti-SLAPPmotionstrikebreachocontractcomplaintbasedonplaintipoliceofcersactionagainsthisex-wieallegingthatherstatementstointernalaairsinvestigatorsandinamilycourtdocumentsviolatedanti-disparagementprovisionsoasettlementagreementtheclaimaroseromprotectedactivitywithinthemeaningotheanti-SLAPPstatuteandplaintiraisednotriableissueoacttodeeatthelitigationprivilegeSeealsoDwightR.v.ChristyB.2013212Cal.App.4th697FourthDist.Div.2trialcourtpropergrantedanti-SLAPPmotiontostrikecomplaintunder42U.S.C.section1983allegingthatdeendantamilytherapistwhoowedstatutorydutytoreportsuspectedchildabuseorneglectconspiredtoalselyaccuseplaintiosexuallyabusinghisdaughterdeendantsactsinconnectionwithofcialgovernmentinvestigationswereinurtheranceotherightsoreespeechorpetitionandplaintididnotproernonspeculativeevidenceromwhichatrieroactcouldndbyreasonableinerenceinavorohisclaimthatdeendantwasastateactororconspiringwithstateactorsundersection1983SeealsoYoungv.CBSBroadcastingInc.2013212Cal.App.4th551TirdDist.trialcourterroneouslydeniedinpartdeendantbroadcastingcompanysanti-SLAPPmotiontostrikedeamationclaimbyacourtappointedconservatorwhoobjectedtoaCBStelecastshowingherinabadlightbecauseplaintiactedasapublicofcialorpurposesodeamationlawandailedtoshowthatdeendantbroadcastersreportwasmadewithactualmaliceshecouldnotdemonstratealikelihoodoprevailingi.e.shedidnotproersubstantialevidencebywhichatrieroactcouldndinheravorbyclearandconvincingevidenceCompareOviedov.WindsorTwelvePropertiesLLC2012212Cal.App.4th97PetitionorReviewdenied041013SecondDist.Div.3trialcourterredinpartybygrantingdeendantsanti-SLAPPmotiontostrikeacomplaintallegingviolationoLosAngelesRentStabilizationOrdinanceandthatallegedviolationwasnotaprotectedactivityandwithrespecttoplaintismaliciousprosecutionclaimplaintimadeaprimaacieshowingsufcienttodeeatdismissalbyoeringevidencethatdeendantvoluntarilydismissedwithoutprejudicetheunderlyingclaimtheyhadailedagainstplaintiandtheevidenceohostilecommunicationsbetweenthepartiessatisedtheminimalmeritshowingneededtoopposeananti-SLAPPmotion.ontinuedfrompageiiierictgreenseetsVoume12013theNinthCircuitobservedthatanti-SLAPPordersaremateriallydierentromorderstoproduceprivilegeddocumentsorpurposesothecollateralorderdoctrine.TiscaseservesasanimportantreminderthatlitigantscantakeadvantageoCaliorniasanti-SLAPPstatutetodeeatstate-lawclaimsbroughtinederalcourtandseekimmediateinterlocutoryappellatereviewithemotionisdenied.CompareNunag-Tanedov.EastBatonRougeParishSchoolBoard9thCir711F.3d11369thCir.CourtoAppealshadnojurisdictionviainterlocutoryappealtoreviewdenialoamotiontodismissederalcourtactionongroundsoimmunityundertheNoerr-PenningtondoctrinewhichbarsactionsbasedonconductprotectedbytheFirstAmendmentrighttopetitionorredressogrievancesunlikeanti-SLAPPdismissalsadismissalundertheNoerr-Penningtondoctrineisnotappealableunderthecollateralorderdoctrinenorwasitreviewableunderpendentappellatejurisdictionwhereanappealromananti-SLAPPorderhasbeenled.complaintbypropertyowneralleginglanderandtradelibelwaubjettodimialundertheanti-sLAPPbutro-omplaintbaedonallegedlyfaleauationofriminalativitywanot.CityofCostaMesav.DAlessioInvestmentsLLC2013214Cal.App.4th358PetitionforReviewled041913caseno.S210098InthisnuisanceabatementactionacommercialpropertyownerwassuedbytheCityoCostaMesaandcross-complainedtoassertclaimsthatcityemployeesunlawullytoldpotentialbusinesstenantstheywouldnotbeabletoobtainlicensestoperormbusinessactivitiesatthepropertybecauseocriminalactivitybythecross-complainant.Tecitymovedtodismisstheactiononthegrounditimplicatedreespeechrightsinconnectionwithpendingpublicjudicialandregulatoryproceedingsandthusmustbedismissedundertheanti-SLAPPstatute.Tetrialcourtpartiallygrantedandpartiallydeniedthemotion.TeCourtoAppealFourthDist.Div.Treereversedinpartholdingthetrialcourtwasrequiredtodismissmoreotheactionthanithaddismissedundertheanti-SLAPPmotion.Tecourtshouldhavegrantedthemotionastocertaincross-deendantswherethecross-complainantsailedtooerevidenceromwhichatrieroactcouldndthosecross-deendantshadmadealsestatements.Howeverthecourtafrmedthetrialcourtsdenialotheanti-SLAPPmotionastocross-deendantswhosomeevidenceindicatedhadalselyaccusedcross-complainantohavingacriminalrecordinastatementthatwasnotprotectedbythelitigationprivilegeorpublicentityimmunities.SeealsoHawranv.Hixson2012209Cal.App.4th256FourthDist.Div.1inactionarisingoutodeendantsallegedlydeamatorypressreleaseaboutplaintiandhiscorporationthetrialcourtproperlydeniedthedeendantsanti-SLAPPmotiontodismisscausesoactionordeamationinvasionoprivacyunairbusinesspracticesaswellasbreachocontractastothecorporationbecausetheplaintiproeredevidenceromwhichatrieroactcouldndmeritinhisclaimsanddeendantsdidnotshowthepressreleasewassufcientlytiedtoanSECinvestigationastobeprotectedbytheairreportingprivilegequaliedcommoninterestprivilegeorlitigationprivilege.Howeverthecourtproperlygrantedtheanti-SLAPPmotiontobarplaintisclaimsorintererencewithprospectiveeconomicadvantageandmisrepresentationaswellasbreachocontractastotheindividualdeendantsbecausethosecausesoactionaroseromawritinginconnectionwithanofcialproceedingandtheplaintisactionsdidnotallwithinthecommercialspeechexemptionromtheanti-SLAPPstatutebecausetherepresentationsmadewerenotrelatedtothecompanysbusinessoperationsSeealsoVivianv.Labrucherie2013214Cal.App.4th267FirstDist.Div.3trialcourterroneouslydeniedanti-SLAPPmotionstrikebreachocontractcomplaintbasedonplaintipoliceofcersactionagainsthisex-wieallegingthatherstatementstointernalaairsinvestigatorsandinamilycourtdocumentsviolatedanti-disparaementprovisionsoasettlementareementtheclaimaroseromprotectedactivitywithinthemeaninotheanti-SLAPPstatuteandplaintiraisednotriableissueoacttodeeatthelitiationprivileeSeealsoDwightR.v.ChristyB.2013212Cal.App.4th697FourthDist.Div.2trialcourtproperrantedanti-SLAPPmotiontostrikecomplaintunder42U.S.C.section1983alleinthatdeendantamilytherapistwhoowedstatutorydutytoreportsuspectedchildabuseornelectconspiredtoalselyaccuseplaintiosexuallyabusinhisdauhterdeendantsactsinconnectionwithofcialovernmentinvestiationswereinurtheranceotherihtsoreespeechorpetitionandplaintididnotproernonspeculativeevidenceromwhichatrieroactcouldndbyreasonableinerenceinavorohisclaimthatdeendantwasastateactororconspirinwithstateactorsundersection1983SeealsoYoungv.CBSBroadcastingInc.2013212Cal.App.4th551TirdDist.trialcourterroneouslydeniedinpartdeendantbroadcastincompanysanti-SLAPPmotiontostrikedeamationclaimbyacourtappointedconservatorwhoobjectedtoaCBStelecastshowinherinabadlihtbecauseplaintiactedasapublicofcialorpurposesodeamationlawandailedtoshowthatdeendantbroadcastersreportwasmadewithactualmaliceshecouldnotdemonstratealikelihoodoprevailingi.e.shedidnotproersubstantialevidencebywhichatrieroactcouldndinheravorbyclearandconvincingevidenceCompareOviedov.WindsorTwelvePropertiesLL2012212Cal.App.4th97PetitionorReviewdenied041013SecondDist.Div.3trialcourterredinpartybygrantingdeendantsanti-SLAPPmotiontostrikeacomplaintallegingviolationoLosAngelesRentStabilizationOrdinanceandthatallegedviolationwasnotaprotectedactivityandwithrespecttoplaintismaliciousprosecutionclaimplaintimadeaprimaacieshowingsufcienttodeeatdismissalbyoeringevidencethatdeendantvoluntarilydismissedwithoutprejudicetheunderlyingclaimtheyhadailedagainstplaintiandtheevidenceohostilecommunicationsbetweenthepartiessatisedtheminimalmeritshowingneededtoopposeananti-SLAPPmotion.ontinuedfrompagei Volume12013verdictgreensheetsiiiUnnpreerhavennunalrghpkenheprvaelywnedwalkwaynfrnfheumerenraneaupermarke.RalphsGroceryCompanyv.UnitedFoodandCommercialWorkersUnionLocal8201255Cal.4th1083InanactionbyasupermarkettoenjoinunionpicketinginrontothestorescustomerentrancethetrialcourtdeniedreliebuttheCourtoAppealreversedndingthatthewalkwaywasnotapublicorumandwasthereoresubjecttoregulationospeechbythepropertyownerinthatarea.TeCaliorniaSupremeCourtconcludedtheprotestershadnoconstitutionalrighttopicketontheprivatelyownedwalkway.Unlikethecommonareasoamalltheentrancetoastoreisnotapublicorum.HoweverthepicketingactivitiesenjoyedsomeprotectionundertheMosconeActCCP527.3andLaborCodesection1138.1regulatinglaborrelations.TisdecisionrepresentsalimitationonthecourtspriorholdinginRobbinsv.PruneyardShoppingCenter197923Cal.3d899andclariesthatprivateshoppingcenterscanexercisegreatercontrolospeechactivitiesinthoseareasoamallorsimilarestablishmentthatarenotdesignedandurnishedinawaythatinducesshopperstocongregateorpurposesoentertainmentrelaxationorconversation.cLAssActioNsU.S.SupremeCourtholdsclasscertifcationismprperabenadamagemdelapablefalulangdamagenalawdeba.ComcastCorp.v.Behrend2013569U.S.______133S.Ct.1426FederalRuleoCivilProcedure23b3permitsclasscerticationonlyiacourtndsthatthequestionsolaworactcommontoclassmemberspredominateoveranyquestionsaectingonlyindividualmembers.TeU.S.SupremeCourtheldthatRule23b3spredominancerequirementcannotbesatisedandthereoreclasscerticationwouldbeimproperwhereaplaintisdamagesmodelailstoestablishthatdamagesarecapableomeasurementonaclasswidebasis.Absentsuchamethodologyorcalculatingdamagesquestionsoindividualdamagecalculationswillinevitablyoverwhelmquestionscommontotheclass.Adamagesmodelmayserveasameansocomputinganawardinaclassactiononlyithemodelmeasuresthosedamagesspecicallyattributabletotheliabilitytheoryorwhichclasstreatmentissought.Attheclass-certicationstageasattrialanymodelsupportingaplaintisdamagescasemustbeconsistentwithitsliabilitycase.IthemodeldoesnotevenattempttodothatitcannotpossiblyestablishthatdamagesaresusceptibletomeasurementacrosstheentireclassorpurposesoRule23b3.WhileearlierauthoritieshadsuggestedatrialcourthassomediscretiontodenyclasscerticationwheresomecommonquestionsoliabilityexistbuttheremedyisnotsuitableorclasswidedeterminationapersistentgeneralizationbeoretheComcastdecisionwastheindividualizedquestionsastodamageswasneversufcienttodeeatcertication.TatconceptispresumablylaidtorestbyComcast.SeealsoDaileyv.SearsRoebuckandCo.2013214Cal.App.4th974FourthDist.Div.1trialcourtproperlydeniedclasscerticationinwage-and-hourcasebecausealthoughsomecommonquestionswerepresentedtheclaimthatmanagersandassistantmanagersweremisclassiedasexemptemployeesraisedindividualizedquestionsnotamenabletoprooonaclasswidebasisplaintisexpertsstatisticalsamplingmethodwasinsufcienttosupportcerticationAtrialcourtdoesnoterrinrejectingaproposedstatisticalsamplingprocedurewhentheclassactionproponentailstoexplainhowtheprocedurewilleectivelymanagetheissuesinquestion.SeealsoMorganv.WetSealInc.2012210Cal.App.4th1341FirstDist.Div.2trialcourtproperlydeniedclasscerticationinwage-and-hourcasewhereemployeesclaimstoreimbursementortravelexpensesandthecostopurchasingmerchandiseromtheemployercouldnotberesolvedonaclass-widebasisplaintisdemonstratednowrittenoruniormlyollowedcompanypolicyrequiringemployeestopurchasecompanymerchandiseorailingtoreimburseormileageinrenderingitsorderthetrialcourtproperlyconsideredthemeritsoplaintiscausesoactiononlyorthelimitedpurposeoassessingwhethersubstantiallysimilarquestionwerecommontotheclassandpredominatedoverindividualquestionsSeealsoWangv.ChineseDailyNewsInc.2013709F.3d8299thCir.juryawardo2.5millionindamagesreversedbecausedistrictcourterredincertiyingaclassactionunderFRCP23b2wherenewspaperemployeessoughtmonetaryrelieduetoallegedLaborCodeandconsumerlawviolationsmoreoverthenamedclassrepresentativeslackedstandingtoseekinjunctivereliebecausetheywerenolongerindeendantsemployhoweverappellatecourtremandedordeterminationwhethermonetaryclaimscouldbecertiedunderrule23b3onthatissuethe9thCircuitquotedtheUnitedStatesSupremeCourtsdecisioninWalmartv.DukeswhichheldWhatmatterstoclasscerticationisnottheraisingocommonquestionsevenindrovesbutratherthecapacityoaclasswideproceedingtogeneratecommonanswersapttodrivetheresolutionothelitigation9thCircuitdisapprovedanysortopresumptionthatclasscerticationisproperwhenanemployersinternalexemptionpoliciesareapplieduniormlytotheemployeesU.s.supremecurhldadefendanmaybandmalfapuaveFLsArepreenaveannmnegrundbyfferngfullyafyhenamedplanfflam.e.whapkffffer.GenesisHealthcareCorp.v.Symczyk2013569U.S.______133S.Ct.1523PlaintiaregisterednursebroughtacollectiveactionundertheFairLaborStandardsActallegingaviolationomealbreakwagerules.SheignoredthedeendantsoertopayherclaimunderFRCP68andthetrialcourtdismissedtheactionasmoot.TeTirdCircuitCourtoAppealsreversed.nnuednpagevVoume12013erictgreenseetsiiiUnnpreerhavennunalrghpkenheprvaelywnedwalkwaynfrnfheumerenraneaupermarke.RalphsGroceryCompanyv.UnitedFoodandCommercialWorkersUnionLocal8201255Cal.4th1083InanactionbyasupermarkettoenjoinunionpicketinginrontothestorescustomerentrancethetrialcourtdeniedreliebuttheCourtoAppealreversedndingthatthewalkwaywasnotapublicorumandwasthereoresubjecttoregulationospeechbythepropertyownerinthatarea.TeCaliorniaSupremeCourtconcludedtheprotestershadnoconstitutionalrighttopicketontheprivatelyownedwalkway.Unlikethecommonareasoamalltheentrancetoastoreisnotapublicorum.HoweverthepicketingactivitiesenjoyedsomeprotectionundertheMosconeActCCP527.3andLaborCodesection1138.1reulatinlaborrelations.TisdecisionrepresentsalimitationonthecourtspriorholdininRobbinsv.PruneyardShoppingCenter197923Cal.3d899andclariesthatprivateshoppingcenterscanexercisegreatercontrolospeechactivitiesinthoseareasoamallorsimilarestablishmentthatarenotdesignedandurnishedinawaythatinducesshopperstocongregateorpurposesoentertainmentrelaxationorconversation.cLAssActioNsU.S.SupremeCourtholdsclasscertifcationismprperabenadamagemdelapablefalulangdamagenalawdeba.ComcastCorp.v.Behrend2013569U.S.______133S.Ct.1426ederalRuleoCivilProcedure23b3permitsclasscerticationonlyiacourtndsthatthequestionsolaworactcommontoclassmemberspredominateoveranyquestionsaectingonlyindividualmembers.TeU.S.SupremeCourtheldthatRule23b3spredominancerequirementcannotbesatisedandthereoreclasscerticationwouldbeimproperwhereaplaintisdamaesmodelailstoestablishthatdamaesarecapableomeasurementonaclasswidebasis.Absentsuchamethodoloyorcalculatindamaesquestionsoindividualdamaecalculationswillinevitablyoverwhelmquestionscommontotheclass.Adamaesmodelmayserveasameansocomputinanawardinaclassactiononlyithemodelmeasuresthosedamaesspecicallyattributabletotheliabilitytheoryorwhichclasstreatmentissouht.Attheclass-certicationstaeasattrialanymodelsupportinaplaintisdamaescasemustbeconsistentwithitsliabilitycase.IthemodeldoesnotevenattempttodothatitcannotpossiblyestablishthatdamaesaresusceptibletomeasurementacrosstheentireclassorpurposesoRule23b3.WhileearlierauthoritieshadsuestedatrialcourthassomediscretiontodenyclasscerticationwheresomecommonquestionsoliabilityexistbuttheremedyisnotsuitableorclasswidedeterminationapersistenteneralizationbeoretheComcastdecisionwastheindividualizedquestionsastodamaeswasneversufcienttodeeatcertication.TatconceptispresumablylaidtorestbyComcast.SeealsoDaileyv.SearsRoebuckandCo.2013214Cal.App.4th74FourthDist.Div.1trialcourtproperlydeniedclasscerticationinwage-and-hourcasebecausealthoughsomecommonquestionswerepresentedtheclaimthatmanagersandassistantmanagersweremisclassiedasexemptemployeesraisedindividualizedquestionsnotamenabletoprooonaclasswidebasisplaintisexpertsstatisticalsamplingmethodwasinsufcienttosupportcerticationAtrialcourtdoesnoterrinrejectingaproposedstatisticalsamplingprocedurewhentheclassactionproponentailstoexplainhowtheprocedurewilleectivelymanagetheissuesinquestion.SeealsoMorganv.WetSealInc.2012210Cal.App.4th341FirstDist.Div.2trialcourtproperlydeniedclasscerticationinwage-and-hourcasewhereemployeesclaimstoreimbursementortravelexpensesandthecostopurchasingmerchandiseromtheemployercouldnotberesolvedonaclass-widebasisplaintisdemonstratednowrittenoruniormlyollowedcompanypolicyrequirinemployeestopurchasecompanymerchandiseorailintoreimburseormileaeinrenderinitsorderthetrialcourtproperlyconsideredthemeritsoplaintiscausesoactiononlyorthelimitedpurposeoassessinwhethersubstantiallysimilarquestionwerecommontotheclassandpredominatedoverindividualquestionsSeealsoWangv.ChineseDailyNewsInc.2013709F.3d8299thCir.juryawardo2.5millionindamaesreversedbecausedistrictcourterredincertiyinaclassactionunderFRCP23b2wherenewspaperemployeessouhtmonetaryrelieduetoalleedLaborCodeandconsumerlawviolationsmoreoverthenamedclassrepresentativeslackedstandintoseekinjunctivereliebecausetheywerenolonerindeendantsemployhoweverappellatecourtremandedordeterminationwhethermonetaryclaimscouldbecertiedunderrule23b3onthatissuethe9thCircuitquotedtheUnitedStatesSupremeCourtsdecisioninWalmartv.DukeswhichheldWhatmatterstoclasscerticationisnottheraisinocommonquestionsevenindrovesbutratherthecapacityoaclasswideproceedingtogeneratecommonanswersapttodrivetheresolutionothelitigation9thCircuitdisapprovedanysortopresumptionthatclasscerticationisproperwhenanemployersinternalexemptionpoliciesareapplieduniormlytotheemployeesU.s.supremecurhldadefendanmaybandmalfapuaveFLsArepreenaveannmnegrundbyfferngfullyafyhenamedplanfflam.e.whapkffffer.GenesisHealthcareCorp.v.Symczyk2013569U.S.______133S.Ct.1523PlaintiaregisterednursebroughtacollectiveactionundertheFairLaborStandardsActallegingaviolationomealbreakwagerules.SheignoredthedeendantsoertopayherclaimunderFRCP68andthetrialcourtdismissedtheactionasmoot.TeTirdCircuitCourtoAppealsreversed.nnuednpagev ivverdictgreensheetsVolume12013TeU.S.SupremeCourtheldthetrialcourthadproperlydismissedtheactionbecausethenamedplainticoncededshehadnocontinuinginterestinthecaseandnootherworkershadoptedintojoinherrepresentativeaction.TecourtdistinguishedclassactionsbroughtunderFRCPrule23inwhichanamedrepresentativesinterestislostonlyaerclasscerticationoraertheerroneousdenialoclasscertication.U.s.suprmcourtholdalarprntatvannotprvntrmovalofaputatvlaatonfromtattofdralourtbytpulatngtoforgodamagthatwouldothrwmaktharmovabl.StandardFireIns.Co.v.Knowles2013568U.S._____133S.Ct.1345ClassrepresentativeKnowlesledaproposedclassactioninArkansasstatecourtagainstStandardFireInsuranceCompany.InaneorttodeeatremovaltoederalcourtundertheClassActionFairnessActwhichallowsremovalincertaincaseswherethepotentialvalueotheclaimexceeds5millionKnowlesstipulatedthattheclasswouldseeklessthan5millionindamages.StandardFirenonethelessremovedthecasearguingthattheamountincontroversyexceeded5millionandthatKnowlesstipulationcouldnotbindtheclass.Teederaldistrictcourtoundthattheamountincontroversydidexceed5millionbutruledthatKnowlesstipulationvalidlylimitedthescopeorelie.TeEighthCircuitagreedandtheactionwasremandedtostatecourt.TeU.S.SupremeCourtreversedinaunanimousopinion.TeCourtheldthataplaintiwholesaproposedclassactioncannotlegallybindmembersotheproposedclassbeoreaclassiscertiedandKnowleslackedauthoritytoseeklessthan5millionindamagesortheclass.AbsentavalidstipulationStandardFirehadproperlyremovedthecase.ClassactionlawyersinArkansasandelsewherehaveusedsuchstipulationsandcomparableloopholestoevadeederaljurisdictionovertheircases.TeSupremeCourtsdecisioneliminatesatacticrequentlyusedbyclassactionlawyerstodeeatederaljurisdictionandurthersCongressobjectiveoensuringthatederalcourtsareavailabletoadjudicatelargeclassactions.SeealsoKuxhausenv.BMWFinancialServicesNALLC2013707F.3d11369thCirreversingdistrictcourtsremandoplaintisproposedclassactiontostatecourtremovalbydeendantcardealershipwastimelywheretheamountincontroversywasnotsucientlystatedbytheinitialpleadingandplaintihadnotpledalltheactsnecessaryordiversityjurisdictionundertheClassActionFairnessActsothattheremovalclockunderSection1446bwasnottriggered.SeealsoRadclifev.ExperianInormationSolutionsInc.9thCir.Apr.222013Nos.11-5637611-5638711-5638911-5639711-5640011-5644011-56482F.3d2013WL17154229thCir.DistrictcourterredinapprovingsettlementoclassactionagainstcreditreportingagenciesbecausetheclassrepresentativesandtheircounseldidnotadequatelyrepresenttheclasswhereagreementconditionedincentiveawardsontheclassrepresentativessupportorthesettlementandprovidedrepresentativeswithrecoveriesthatsignicantlyexceededwhatabsentclassmemberswouldreceiveU.s.suprmcourtholdthatndvdualqutonatowhthrmrprntatonarmatralnurtfraudanotabarriertoclasscertifcation.AmgenInc.v.ConnecticutRetirementPlansandTrustFunds2013568U.S.______133S.Ct.1184orecoverdamagesinaprivatesecuritiesraudactionundersection10botheSecuritiesExchangeActo1934andSecuritiesandExchangeCommissionrule10b-5aplaintimustproverelianceuponthedeendantsmaterialmisrepresentationsoromissions.TeU.S.SupremeCourthaspreviouslyendorsedaraud-on-the-markettheorythatpermitscertainplaintisallegingsecuritiesraudviolationstoinvokearebuttablepresumptionorelianceonmaterialmisrepresentationsairedtothegeneralpublic.Courtshavedisagreedovertheeectothisruleinthecontextoplaintisseekingtocertiyaclassactionunderrule23b3andwhetherindividualizedissuesraisedbytherelianceelementprecludeclasscerticationunderFederalRuleoCivilProcedure23b3.InAmgentheSupremeCourtheldthatprooomaterialityisnotneededtosatisyrule23b3spredominancerequirementorclasstreatmentoederalsecuritiesactionsbecausethepotentialimmaterialityothemisrepresentationsandomissionsisnobarriertoclasstreatment.InterestinglyourothejusticesJusticesScaliaKennedyTomasandAlitosignaledthattheymightbeamenabletoreconsideringtheproprietyotheraud-on-the-markettheoryinanappropriateuturecase.eViDeNcecalfornasuprmcourtovrturnproralawrgardngfraudxptontoparolvdnrul.RiverislandColdStorageInc.v.Fresno-MaderaProductionCreditAssociation201355Cal.4th1169Plaintissuedtheircreditassociationorraudandnegligentmisrepresentationinconnectionwithplaintisdeaultonaloan.TetrialcourtgrantedsummaryjudgmentbecauseplaintisclaimsdependedonparolevidencethatthecourtoundwasinadmissibleundertherulesetorthinBankoAmericaetc.Assn.v.Pendergrass19354Cal.2d258whichheldthattheraudexceptiontotheparolevidenceruleCodeoCivilProceduresection1856subdivisiondidnotapplywhenthepartyassertingraudclaimedapromisedirectlyatvariancewiththepromiseothewriting.TeCourtoAppealreversedbasedonaverynarrowreadingoPrendergrass.TeCaliorniaSupremeCourtoverruleditslongstandingdecisioninPrendergrassnotingthatthePendergrasslimitationndsnosupportinthelanguageothestatutecodiyingtheparolevidenceruleandtheexceptionorevidenceoraud.Itisdiculttoapply.ItconfictswiththedoctrineotheRestatementsmosttreatisesandthemajorityooursister-statejurisdictions.FurthermorewhileontnudfrompagontnudonpagviverictgreenseetsVoume12013TeU.S.SupremeCourtheldthetrialcourthadproperlydismissedtheactionbecausethenamedplainticoncededshehadnocontinuinginterestinthecaseandnootherworkershadoptedintojoinherrepresentativeaction.TecourtdistinguishedclassactionsbroughtunderFRCPrule23inwhichanamedrepresentativesinterestislostonlyaerclasscerticationoraertheerroneousdenialoclasscertication.U.s.suprmcourtholdalarprntatvannotprvntrmovalofaputatvlaatonfromtattofdralourtbytpulatngtoforgodamagthatwouldothrwmaktharmovabl.StandardFireIns.Co.v.Knowles2013568U.S._____133S.Ct.1345lassrepresentativeKnowlesledaproposedclassactioninArkansasstatecourtagainstStandardFireInsuranceCompany.InaneorttodeeatremovaltoederalcourtundertheClassActionairnessActwhichallowsremovalincertaincaseswherethepotentialvalueotheclaimexceeds5millionKnowlesstipulatedthattheclasswouldseeklessthan5millionindamages.Standardirenonethelessremovedthecasearguingthattheamountincontroversyexceeded5millionandthatKnowlesstipulationcouldnotbindtheclass.Teederaldistrictcourtoundthattheamountincontroversydidexceed5millionbutruledthatKnowlesstipulationvalidlylimitedthescopeorelie.TeEighthCircuitagreedandtheactionwasremandedtostatecourt.TeU.S.SupremeCourtreversedinaunanimousopinion.TeourtheldthataplaintiwholesaproposedclassactioncannotlegallybindmembersotheproposedclassbeoreaclassiscertiedandKnowleslackedauthoritytoseeklessthan5millionindamagesortheclass.AbsentavalidstipulationStandardFirehadproperlyremovedthecase.lassactionlawyersinArkansasandelsewherehaveusedsuchstipulationsandcomparableloopholestoevadeederaljurisdictionovertheircases.TeSupremeCourtsdecisioneliminatesatacticrequentlyusedbyclassactionlawyerstodeeatederaljurisdictionandurthersCongressobjectiveoensuringthatederalcourtsareavailabletoadjudicatelargeclassactions.SeealsoKuxhausenv.BMWFinancialServicesNALL2013707F.3d11369thCirreversingdistrictcourtsremandoplaintisproposedclassactiontostatecourtremovalbydeendantcardealershipwastimelywheretheamountincontroversywasnotsucientlystatedbytheinitialpleadingandplaintihadnotpledalltheactsnecessaryordiversityjurisdictionundertheClassActionFairnessActsothattheremovalclockunderSection1446bwasnottriggered.SeealsoRadclifev.ExperianInormationSolutionsInc.9thCir.Apr.222013Nos.11-5637611-5638711-5638911-5639711-5640011-5644011-56482F.3d2013WL17154229thCir.DistrictcourterredinapprovingsettlementoclassactionagainstcreditreportingagenciesbecausetheclassrepresentativesandtheircounseldidnotadequatelyrepresenttheclasswhereagreementconditionedincentiveawardsontheclassrepresentativessupportorthesettlementandprovidedrepresentativeswithrecoveriesthatsinicantlyexceededwhatabsentclassmemberswouldreceiveU.s.suprmcourtholdthatndvdualqutonatowhthrmrprntatonarmatralnurtfraudanotabarriertoclasscertifcation.AmgenInc.v.ConnecticutRetirementPlansandTrustFunds2013568U.S.______133S.Ct.1184orecoverdamagesinaprivatesecuritiesraudactionundersection0botheSecuritiesExchangeActo1934andSecuritiesandExchangeCommissionrule10b-5aplaintimustproverelianceuponthedeendantsmaterialmisrepresentationsoromissions.Te.S.SupremeCourthaspreviouslyendorsedaraud-on-the-markettheorythatpermitscertainplaintisallegingsecuritiesraudviolationstoinvokearebuttablepresumptionorelianceonmaterialisrepresentationsairedtotheeneralpublic.Courtshavedisareedovertheeectothisruleinthecontextoplaintisseekintocertiyaclassactionunderrule23b3andwhetherindividualizedissuesraisedbytherelianceelementprecludeclasscerticationunderFederalRuleoCivilProcedure23b3.InmgentheSupremeCourtheldthatprooomaterialityisnotneededtosatisyrule23b3spredominancerequirementorclasstreatmentoederalsecuritiesactionsbecausethepotentialimmaterialityothemisrepresentationsandomissionsisnobarriertoclasstreatment.InterestinlyourothejusticesJusticesScaliaennedyTomasandAlitosinaledthattheymihtbeamenabletoreconsiderintheproprietyotheraud-on-the-markettheoryinanappropriateuturecase.eViDeNcecalfornasuprmcourtovrturnproralawrgardngfraudxptontoparolvdnrul.RiverislandColdStorageInc.v.Fresno-MaderaProductionCreditAssociation201355Cal.4th1169Plaintissuedtheircreditassociationorraudandnegligentmisrepresentationinconnectionwithplaintisdeaultonaloan.TetrialcourtgrantedsummaryjudgmentbecauseplaintisclaimsdependedonparolevidencethatthecourtoundwasinadmissibleundertherulesetorthinBankoAmericaetc.Assn.v.Pendergrass19354Cal.2d258whichheldthattheraudexceptiontotheparolevidenceruleCodeoCivilProceduresection1856subdivisiondidnotapplywhenthepartyassertingraudclaimedapromisedirectlyatvariancewiththepromiseothewriting.TeCourtoAppealreversedbasedonaverynarrowreadingoPrendergrass.TeCaliorniaSupremeCourtoverruleditslongstandingdecisioninPrendergrassnotingthattheendergrasslimitationndsnosupportinthelanguageothestatutecodiyingtheparolevidenceruleandtheexceptionorevidenceoraud.Itisdiculttoapply.ItconfictswiththedoctrineotheRestatementsmosttreatisesandthemajorityooursister-statejurisdictions.Furthermorewhileontnudfrompagontnudonpagv Volume12013verdictgreensheetsvintendedtopreventraudtheruleestablishedinPendergrassmayactuallyprovideashieldorraudulentconduct.FinallyPendergrassdepartedromestablishedCaliornialawatthetimeitwasdecidedandneitheracknowledgednorjustiedtheabrogation.TeCourtconcludedPendergrassshouldbesetasideinavoroallowingraudclaimstobemadeevenwhentheyarebasedonrepresentationsatvariancewiththetermsoawrittenintegratedagreement.Howeverthetermsotheagreementorevidenceoaailuretoreadtheagreementmaydemonstratealackoreasonablerelianceontheallegedrepresentations.AccordinglytheCourtremandedorurtherproceedingsonthesummaryjudgmentmotion.LABoRANDeMPLoYMeNtLAWPlainiffrvryfrdiriminaininvilainfcalifrnialawilimidwhrmplyrprviwuldhavmadhamallgdlydiriminarydiinrminahplainifffrlawfulran.Harrisv.CityofSantaMonica201355Cal.4th203TeplaintibusdriverallegedsexdiscriminationinviolationoCaliorniasFairEmploymentandHousingActFEHAwhichgenerallyprohibitsemployersromdischargingemployeesbecauseotheirsexorrelatedlybecauseoapregnancy.TedeendantCityemployerargueditredplaintiorpoorjobperormanceandaskedthatthejurybeinstructedtondnoliabilityiitslegitimatemotivealonewouldhaveledittomakethesamedecision.Tetrialcourtreusedtheinstructionandthejuryoundorplainti.TeCourtoAppealreversedduetoinstructionalerror.TeCaliorniaSupremeCourtheldthatevenaferaplaintiprovesthatdiscriminationwasasubstantialactormotivatinghisorherterminationromemploymenttheemployerisstillentitledtoprovebyapreponderanceotheevidencethatlegitimatenondiscriminatoryreasonswouldhaveledittomakethesamedecisionatthesametime.Itheemployerprevailsonthatissuetheplainticannotbeawardeddamagesbackpayoranorderoreinstatement.Teplaintimayhoweverstillbeawardeddeclaratoryrelieinjunctiverelieandstatutoryattorneyseesandcosts.AttoRNeYFeesANDcostsArnyfawardprvailingdfndanundrcalifrniaDiabldPrnAarmandaryandarnprmpdbyfdrallawundrAmrianwihDiabiliiA.Jankeyv.Lee201255Cal.4th1039Inthisactionassertingviolationsobothederalandstateanti-discriminationlawsthedeendantprevailedandthetrialcourtawardedeesunderCivilCodesection55partotheCaliorniaDisabledPersonsActCiv.Code54etseq..Tatstatuteprovidesoranawardoeestotheprevailingpartyinanactiontoenjoindisabilityaccessviolations.TeCourtoAppealarmed.TeCaliorniaSupremeCourtarmedholdingthatadeendantwhoprevailsinsuchanactionisentitledtoamandatoryawardoattorneyees.Teplainlanguageosection55whichprovidesthattheprevailingpartyintheactionshallbeentitledtorecoverreasonableattorneyseesmakesclearthatsucheesaremandatoryoranyprevailingpartyincludingaprevailingdeendant.TeederalAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct42U.S.C.12101etseq.doesnotpreemptthisreadingosection55.WhilethediscretionaryeeprovisionotheADAallowseestoprevailingdeendantsonlywheretheywererequiredtorespondtorivolousclaimstheADAdoesnotpreemptstatelawsthataordprotectionequaltoorbetterthanthataordedbyADA.TeCourtreasonedthatsection55qualiesasastatelawthataordsinatleastsomerespectsgreaterprotectionthanitsederalcounterpart.InsoholdingthecourtdisagreedwiththeNinthCircuitsdecisioninHubbardv.SoBreckLLC9thCir.2009554F.3d742.SeealsoMarxv.GeneralRevenueCorp.2013568U.S.133S.Ct.1166U.S.SupremeCourtinplaintisunsuccessulactionundertheFairDebtCollectionPracticesActadistrictcourtretainsdiscretiontoawardcoststoaprevailingdeendantunderFRCP54d1evenithereisnoshowingobadaithbytheplaintithestatuteisnotcontrarytoandthusnotdisplacedby15U.S.C.Sec.1692ka3whichpermitsanawardoattorneyeesandcoststoaprevailingdeendantwherethesuitisbroughtinbadaithCompareLefeminev.Wideman2012568U.S.133S.Ct.9184L.Ed2d313U.S.SupremeCourtinanactionallegingunconstitutionalconductbygovernmentocialsaplaintiwhoobtainednomonetaryreliebutobtainedapermanentinjunctionrequiringthedeendantocialstochangetheirbehaviorinawaythatdirectlybenetedtheplaintitheplaintiwasaprevailingpartywhowouldgenerallybeentitledtoreasonableeesunder42U.S.C.Sec.1988AndseeAlemanv.AirTouchCellular2012209Cal.App.4th556PetitionorReviewgranted031412SecondDist.Div.2Wheretrialcourtproperlygrantedsummaryjudgmentinactionbyemployeeassertingwage-and-hourclaimsallegingarighttoadditionalreportingtimeandsplitshifpaytheormerwasaclaimorunpaidwagessubjecttoSec.218.5whichallowsaprevailingdeendanttorecoverattorneyeeswhilethelatterwasaclaimorunpaidminimumwagecompensationsubjecttoLaborCodeSec.1194whichdoesnotpermitrecoveryoattorneyeesbyaprevailingdeendant.TedeendantemployerwasentitledtoanallocationoitseesincurredoneachclaimsoastoobtainanawardoeesontheormerclaimAndseeSandsAssociatesv.Juknavorian2012209Cal.App.4th1269SecondDist.Div.1lawrmcannotrecoverprevailingpartyeeswhereitisrepresentedbyrmmembersandsinceocounselattorneyshaveaclosepersonalregularandcontinuouswiththermthesameruleappliestodenyeesorocounselservices.ninudfrmpagivVoume12013erictgreenseetsintendedtopreventraudtheruleestablishedinPendergrassmayactuallyprovideashieldorraudulentconduct.FinallyPendergrassdepartedromestablishedCaliornialawatthetimeitwasdecidedandneitheracknowledgednorjustiedtheabrogation.TeCourtconcludedPendergrassshouldbesetasideinavoroallowingraudclaimstobemadeevenwhentheyarebasedonrepresentationsatvariancewiththetermsoawrittenintegratedagreement.Howeverthetermsotheagreementorevidenceoaailuretoreadtheagreementmaydemonstratealackoreasonablerelianceontheallegedrepresentations.AccordinglytheCourtremandedorurtherproceedingsonthesummaryjudgmentmotion.LABoRANDeMPLoYMeNtLAWPlainiffrvryfrdiriminaininvilainfcalifrnialawilimidwhrmplyrprviwuldhavmadhamallgdlydiriminarydiinrminahplainifffrlawfulran.Harrisv.CityofSantaMonica201355Cal.4th203TeplaintibusdriverallegedsexdiscriminationinviolationoaliorniasFairEmploymentandHousingActFEHAwhichgenerallyprohibitsemployersromdischargingemployeesbecauseotheirsexorrelatedlybecauseoapregnancy.TedeendantCityemployerargueditredplaintiorpoorjobperormanceandaskedthatthejurybeinstructedtondnoliabilityiitslegitimatemotivealonewouldhaveledittomakethesamedecision.Tetrialcourtreusedtheinstructionandthejuryoundorplainti.TeCourtoAppealreversedduetoinstructionalerror.TeCaliorniaSupremeCourtheldthatevenaferaplaintiprovesthatdiscriminationwasasubstantialactormotivatinghisorherterminationromemploymenttheemployerisstillentitledtoprovebyapreponderanceotheevidencethatlegitimatenondiscriminatoryreasonswouldhaveledittomakethesamedecisionatthesametime.Itheemployerprevailsonthatissuetheplainticannotbeawardeddamagesbackpayoranorderoreinstatement.Teplaintimayhoweverstillbeawardeddeclaratoryrelieinjunctiverelieandstatutoryattorneyseesandcosts.toRNeYFeesANDcostsArnyfawardprvailingdfndanundrcalifrniaDiabldPrnAarmandaryandarnprmpdbyfdrallawundrAmrianwihDiabiliiA.Jankeyv.Lee201255Cal.4th1039nthisactionassertingviolationsobothederalandstateanti-discriminationlawsthedeendantprevailedandthetrialcourtawardedeesunderCivilCodesection55partotheCaliorniaisabledPersonsActCiv.Code54etseq..Tatstatuteprovidesoranawardoeestotheprevailingpartyinanactiontoenjoindisabilityaccessviolations.TeCourtoAppealarmed.TeCaliorniaSupremeCourtarmedholdinthatadeendantwhoprevailsinsuchanactionisentitledtoamandatoryawardoattorneyees.Teplainlanguageosection55whichprovidesthattheprevailingpartyintheactionshallbeentitledtorecoverreasonableattorneyseesmakesclearthatsucheesaremandatoryoranyprevailingpartyincludingaprevailingdeendant.TeederalAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct42U.S.C.12101etseq.doesnotpreemptthisreadingosection55.WhilethediscretionaryeeprovisionotheADAallowseestoprevailingdeendantsonlywheretheywererequiredtorespondtorivolousclaimstheADAdoesnotpreemptstatelawsthataordprotectionequaltoorbetterthanthataordedbyADA.TeCourtreasonedthatsection55qualiesasastatelawthataordsinatleastsomerespectsgreaterprotectionthanitsederalcounterpart.InsoholdingthecourtdisagreedwiththeNinthCircuitsdecisioninHubbardv.SoBreckLLC9thCir.2009554F.3d742.SeealsoMarxv.GeneralRevenueCorp.2013568U.S.133S.Ct.1166U.S.SupremeCourtinplaintisunsuccessulactionundertheFairDebtCollectionPracticesActadistrictcourtretainsdiscretiontoawardcoststoaprevailindeendantunderFRCP54d1evenithereisnoshowinobadaithbytheplaintithestatuteisnotcontrarytoandthusnotdisplacedby15U.S.C.Sec.1692ka3whichpermitsanawardoattorneyeesandcoststoaprevailindeendantwherethesuitisbrouhtinbadaithCompareLefeminev.Wideman2012568U.S.133S.Ct.984L.Ed2d313U.S.SupremeCourtinanactionalleinunconstitutionalconductbyovernmentocialsaplaintiwhoobtainednomonetaryreliebutobtainedapermanentinjunctionrequirinthedeendantocialstochanetheirbehaviorinawaythatdirectlybenetedtheplaintitheplaintiwasaprevailinpartywhowouldenerallybeentitledtoreasonableeesunder42U.S.C.Sec.1988AndseeAlemanv.AirTouchCellula2012209Cal.App.4th556PetitionorReviewranted031412SecondDist.Div.2Wheretrialcourtproperlyrantedsummaryjudmentinactionbyemployeeassertinwae-and-hourclaimsalleinarihttoadditionalreportintimeandsplitshifpaytheormerwasaclaimorunpaidwaessubjecttoSec.218.5whichallowsaprevailingdeendanttorecoverattorneyeeswhilethelatterwasaclaimorunpaidminimumwagecompensationsubjecttoLaborCodeSec.1194whichdoesnotpermitrecoveryoattorneyeesbyaprevailingdeendant.TedeendantemployerwasentitledtoanallocationoitseesincurredoneachclaimsoastoobtainanawardoeesontheormerclaimAndseeSandsAssociatesv.Juknavorian2012209Cal.App.4th269SecondDist.Div.1lawrmcannotrecoverprevailingpartyeeswhereitisrepresentedbyrmmembersandsinceocounselattorneyshaveaclosepersonalregularandcontinuouswiththermthesameruleappliestodenyeesorocounselservices.ninudfrmpagiv viverdictgreensheetsVolume12013ccP998ffrvalddphavngbnmadjnlyplanffnawrngfuldahan.McDanielv.Asuncion2013214Cal.App.4th1201InthiswronguldeathactionthetrialcourtawardedexpertwitnesseestothedeendantwhomadeanoertotheplaintisunderCCP998beoretrial.Tecourtoundthattheusualruleinvalidatingsuchoerswheremadejointlytomultipleplaintisdidnotapplyinwronguldeathactions.TeCourtoAppealFihDist.armedconcludingAlthoughjointoersmaybeinvalidsuchwasnotthecasehere.Inawronguldeathactionasinglejointcauseoactionisgiventoallheirsandthejudgmentmustbeorasinglelumpsum.Aunitaryverdictcaneasilybecomparedtoajointoertodeterminewhethertheoeringpartyhasachievedamoreavorablejudgment.Tusthereislittleianyjusticationorinvalidatingajointoermadeinawronguldeathcase.Otherappellatecourtshavereacheddierentconclusionsonthisissue.SeealsoWhatley-Millerv.Cooper2013212Cal.App.4th1103SecondDist.Div.8trialcourtproperlyoundaCCP998oerwasvalidinthatitwasnotmadeinbadaithdespitethetimingotheoeronlytwoweeksaerdiscoveryresponseswereservedandwithrespecttothestatutoryrequirementthatanoerincludemeansoacceptancethestatutewassatisedbytheenclosureoanacceptanceormonadocumentseparateromthedocumentrefectingthetermsotheocerbutreerencingtheoerandservedonthedeendantinthesameenvelope.toRtLAWPrmaryaumpnfrkdrnapplallnhrnlydangrurranalavnnlyavpr.Nalwav.CedarFair201255Cal.4th1148Teplaintiinthisactionsuedanamusementparkaershesustainedaracturedwristduringabumpercarride.TetrialcourtgrantedsummaryjudgmentbuttheCourtoAppealreversed.TeSupremeCourtheldthattheprimaryassumptionoriskdoctrineappliedtobartheclaim.Tedoctrineappliesaswelltootherrecreationalactivitiesinvolvinganinherentriskoinjurytovoluntaryparticipants...wheretheriskcannotbeeliminatedwithoutalteringtheundamentalnatureotheactivity.Citation....Allowingvoluntaryparticipantsinanactiverecreationalpursuittosueotherparticipantsorsponsorsorailingtoeliminateormitigatetheactivitysinherentriskswouldthreatentheactivitysveryexistenceandnature.Tecourtrejectedtheargumentthatsaetyregulationsgoverningamusementparkridesexemptedthemromtheprimaryassumptionoriskdoctrine.Whiletheregulationsweredesignedtopreventseriousinjuriesasmalldegreeoriskinevitablyaccompaniesthethrillospeedingthroughcurvesandloopsdeyinggravityorinbumpercarsengaginginthemockviolenceolow-speedcollisions.Tecourtalsoclariedthatthebartoliabilityappliesnotonlytoparticipantsbutalsotosponsorssuchastheamusementparkdeendantwhoderiveeconomicbenetsromrecreationalactivities.Undertheprimaryassumptionoriskdoctrineoperatorssponsorsandinstructorsinrecreationalactivitiesposinginherentrisksoinjuryhavenodutytoeliminatethoserisksbutdooweparticipantsthedutynottounreasonablyincreasetherisksoinjurybeyondthoseinherentintheactivity.PanfallbaufllapnghpalbdraldnnvlvprfnalnglgnwhnhmanngfMicRA.Floresv.PresbyterianIntercommunityHospital2013213Cal.App.4th1386Inthisactionbyapatientinjuredwhensheellromahospitalbedaerthebedsrailcollapsedthetrialcourtsustainedthedeendantsdemurrerndingtheactionwasbarredbytheone-yearstatuteolimitationsCodeCiv.Proc.340.5undertheMedicalInjuryCompensationReormActMICRA.Tatstatuteappliesinanactionorinjuryordeathagainstahealthcareproviderbaseduponsuchpersonsallegedproessionalnegligence.Proessionalnegligenceisdenedinpartasanegligentactoromissiontoactbyahealthcareproviderintherenderingoproessionalservices.TeCourtoAppealSecondDist.Div.TreeheldMICRAdidnotapplyundertheactsothiscaseconcludingthattheplaintisactionsoundsinordinarynegligencebecausethenegligencedidnotoccurintherenderingoproessionalservices.Tecourtdistinguishedothercasesinwhichtheallsresultedromtheailuretoproperlysecureorsupervisethepatientwhileonahospitalbedorgurney.InFlorestheplaintiallegesshewasinjuredbyanequipmentfailurei.e.acollapsedbedrail.Originalemphasis.TecourturtherobservedWereject...dictumthatanegligentlymaintainedunsaeconditionoahospitalspremiseswhichcausesinjurytoapatientallswithinproessionalnegligence.cAsesPeNDiNGiNtHecALiFoRNiAsUPReMecoURtAddrngwhhrhprmaryaumpnfrkdrnapplyaargvrunganAlzhmrpanfrnjuraudbyhpan.Gregoryv.Cottcaseno.S209125formerlypublishedat213Cal.App.4th41Tisisanactionbyanin-homecaregiveragainstanAlzheimerspatientornegligencebatteryandpremisesliabilityagainstapatientwithAlzheimersdiseaseandthepatientshusband.AdividedCourtoAppealheldthatthedoctrinealsoappliestobaraclaimbycaregiverhiredtoprovidecareandsupervisioninaprivatehometoanAlzheimerspatientknowntobeviolent.TeSupremeCourtgrantedreviewonApril102013toaddresstheollowingissueDidthedoctrineoprimaryassumptionotheriskbarthecomplaintordamagesbroughtbyanin-homecaregiveragainstanAlzheimerspatientandherhusbandorinjuriesthecaregiverreceivedwhenthepatientlungedatherierictgreenseetsVoume12013ccP998ffrvalddphavngbnmadjnlyplanffnawrngfuldahan.McDanielv.Asuncion2013214Cal.App.4th1201InthiswronuldeathactionthetrialcourtawardedexpertwitnesseestothedeendantwhomadeanoertotheplaintisunderCCP998beoretrial.Tecourtoundthattheusualruleinvalidatingsuchoerswheremadejointlytomultipleplaintisdidnotapplyinwronguldeathactions.TeCourtoAppealFihDist.armedconcludingAlthoughjointoersmaybeinvalidsuchwasnotthecasehere.Inawronguldeathactionasinglejointcauseoactionisgiventoallheirsandthejudgmentmustbeorasinglelumpsum.Aunitaryverdictcaneasilybecomparedtoajointoertodeterminewhethertheoeringpartyhasachievedamoreavorablejudgment.Tusthereislittleianyjusticationorinvalidatingajointoermadeinawronguldeathcase.OtherappellatecourtshavereacheddierentconclusionsonthisissueSeealsoWhatley-Millerv.Coope2013212Cal.App.4th1103SecondDist.Div.8trialcourtproperlyoundaCCP998oerwasvalidinthatitwasnotmadeinbadaithdespitethetimingotheoeronlytwoweeksaerdiscoveryresponseswereservedandwithrespecttothestatutoryrequirementthatanoerincludemeansoacceptancethestatutewassatisedbytheenclosureoanacceptanceormonadocumentseparateromthedocumentrefectingthetermsotheocerbutreerencingtheoerandservedonthedeendantinthesameenvelope.toRtLAWPrmaryaumpnfrkdrnapplallnhrnlydangrurranalavnnlyavpr.Nalwav.CedarFair201255Cal.4th1148Teplaintiinthisactionsuedanamusementparkaershesustainedaracturedwristdurinabumpercarride.TetrialcourtrantedsummaryjudmentbuttheCourtoAppealreversed.TeSupremeCourtheldthattheprimaryassumptionoriskdoctrineappliedtobartheclaim.Tedoctrineappliesaswelltootherrecreationalactivitiesinvolvinaninherentriskoinjurytovoluntaryparticipants...wheretheriskcannotbeeliminatedwithoutalterintheundamentalnatureotheactivity.Citation....Allowinvoluntaryparticipantsinanactiverecreationalpursuittosueotherparticipantsorsponsorsorailintoeliminateormitiatetheactivitysinherentriskswouldthreatentheactivitysveryexistenceandnature.Tecourtrejectedthearumentthatsaetyreulationsoverninamusementparkridesexemptedthemromtheprimaryassumptionoriskdoctrine.Whilethereulationsweredesinedtopreventseriousinjuriesasmalldereeoriskinevitablyaccompaniesthethrillospeedinthrouhcurvesandloopsdeyinravityorinbumpercarsenaininthemockviolenceolow-speedcollisions.Tecourtalsoclariedthatthebartoliabilityappliesnotonlytoparticipantsbutalsotosponsorssuchastheamusementparkdeendantwhoderiveeconomicbenetsromrecreationalactivities.Undertheprimaryassumptionoriskdoctrineoperatorssponsorsandinstructorsinrecreationalactivitiesposinginherentrisksoinjuryhavenodutytoeliminatethoserisksbutdooweparticipantsthedutynottounreasonablyincreasetherisksoinjurybeyondthoseinherentintheactivity.PanfallbaufllapnghpalbdraldnnvlvprfnalnglgnwhnhmanngfMicRA.Floresv.PresbyterianIntercommunityHospital2013213Cal.App.4th1386Inthisactionbyapatientinjuredwhensheellromahospitalbedaerthebedsrailcollapsedthetrialcourtsustainedthedeendantsdemurrerndingtheactionwasbarredbytheone-yearstatuteolimitationsCodeCiv.Proc.340.5undertheMedicalInjuryCompensationReormActMICRA.Tatstatuteappliesinanactionorinjuryordeathaainstahealthcareproviderbaseduponsuchpersonsalleedproessionalnelience.Proessionalnelienceisdenedinpartasanelientactoromissiontoactbyahealthcareproviderintherenderinoproessionalservices.TeCourtoAppealSecondDist.Div.TreeheldMICRAdidnotapplyundertheactsothiscaseconcludinthattheplaintisactionsoundsinordinaryneliencebecausetheneliencedidnotoccurintherenderinoproessionalservices.Tecourtdistinuishedothercasesinwhichtheallsresultedromtheailuretoproperlysecureorsupervisethepatientwhileonahospitalbedorurney.InFlorestheplaintialleesshewasinjuredbyanequipmentfailurei.e.acollapsedbedrail.Oriinalemphasis.TecourturtherobservedWereject...dictumthatanelientlymaintainedunsaeconditionoahospitalspremiseswhichcausesinjurytoapatientallswithinproessionalnelience.cAsesPeNDiNGiNtHecALiFoRNiAsUPReMecoURtAddrngwhhrhprmaryaumpnfrkdrnapplyaargvrunganAlzhmrpanfrnjuraudbyhpan.Gregoryv.Cottcaseno.S209125formerlypublishedat213Cal.App.4th41isisanactionbyanin-homecaregiveragainstanAlzheimerspatientornegligencebatteryandpremisesliabilityagainstapatientwithAlzheimersdiseaseandthepatientshusband.AdividedCourtoAppealheldthatthedoctrinealsoappliestobaraclaimbycaregiverhiredtoprovidecareandsupervisioninaprivatehometoanAlzheimerspatientknowntobeviolent.TeSupremeCourtgrantedreviewonApril102013toaddresstheollowingissueDidthedoctrineoprimaryassumptionotheriskbarthecomplaintordamagesbroughtbyanin-homecaregiveragainstanAlzheimerspatientandherhusbandorinjuriesthecaregiverreceivedwhenthepatientlungedather Volume12013verdictgreensheetsviiAddrssingthmaningofadvrtisinginjuryinthovraglausofagnralliabilityinsuranpoliy.HartfordCasualtyInsuranceCompanyv.SwiftDistributionInc.caseno.S207172formerlypublishedat210Cal.App.4th915InthisinsurancecoveragedisputetheinsurersliabilitypolicypromisedtodeendtheinsuredSwifagainstlawsuitsthatsoughtdamagesoranadvertisinginjury.Tepolicydenedadvertisinginjuryasaninjuryarisingromthepublicationomaterialthatdisparagesapersonsproduct.Swifwassuedordamagesthatallegedlyresultedromitsadvertisementsandaskedtheinsurertodeendthelawsuit.TeinsurerdeniedcoverageandledadeclaratoryrelieactiontoestablishthatitowednodutytodeendSwif.TetrialcourtgrantedsummaryjudgmentortheinsurerandtheCourtoAppealarmedndingtheSwifadvertisementdidnotdisparagetheproductsotheplaintiintheunderlyinglawsuit.Tecourtheldthatdisparagementrequiresaninjuriousalsehoodwhichspecicallyreerstothederogatedproduct.InthiscaseSwifsadvertisementmadenomentionotheplaintisproduct.InreachingitsholdingtheSwifcourtdisagreedwiththereasoninginTravelersPropertyCasualtyCo.oAmericav.CharlotteRusseHoldingInc.2012207Cal.App.4th969.TeSupremeCourtgrantedreviewonFebruary132013toaddresswhetheranadvertisinginjuryprovisioninageneralliabilitypolicyrequiredtheinsurertoprovideadeenseagainstaclaimthattheinsuredsadvertisementsdisparagedanothercompanysproductwhentheadvertisementscontainednoalsestatementsanddidnotmentiontheothercompanysproduct.AddrssingthsopofourtsrviwofarbitrationawardsandofthhonstblifdfnsundrcaliforniaFamilyRightsAt.Richeyv.AutonationInc.caseno.S207536formerlypublishedat210Cal.App.4th1516TiscaseinvolvesaterminatedemployeesclaimsagainsthisemployerorviolationotheCaliorniaFamilyRightsActCFRAandtheproprietyocourtreviewothesubstanceoanarbitratorsawardresolvingthoseclaims.TearbitratorinthiscaseruledthatbecausetheterminationwasbasedontheemployershonestbeliethattheemployeewasviolatingleavepoliciesbyworkinginasecondjobwhileonamilyleavetheemployerwasprotectedagainstliabilityundertheCFRA.Tetrialcourtconrmedtheaward.TeCourtoAppealreversedandvacatedtheawardaferundertakingsubstantivereviewothearbitratorsdecisionandrejectingthehonestbeliedeense.TecourtreliedonPearsonDentalSuppliesInc.v.SuperiorCourt201048Cal.4th665andArmendarizv.FoundationHealthPsychcareServicesInc.200024Cal.4th83assupportorthepropositionthatwhereanarbitratoraddressesclaimsorviolationounwaivablestatutoryrightstheawardinatleastsomecircumstancesissubjecttodenovojudicialrevieworlegalerror.TeSupremeCourtgrantedreviewonFebruary132013toaddresstheollowingissues1IsanemployershonestbeliethatanemployeewasviolatingcompanypolicyorabusingmedicalleaveacompletedeensetotheemployeesclaimthattheemployerviolatedtheMoore-Brown-RobertiFamilyRightsActGov.Code12945.112945.22WasthedecisionbelowtovacatethearbitrationawardintheemployersavorconsistentwiththelimitedjudicialreviewoarbitrationawardsSeealsoOxfordHealthPlansLLCv.Suttersee3rdCir.2012675F.3d215theU.S.SupremeCourthasgrantedcertioraritodecideanissuelefopenbyitsearlierdecisioninStolt-NielsenS.A.v.AnimalFeedsInternationalCorp.130S.Ct.17582010whichheldthatundertheFederalArbitrationActapartymaynotbecompelled...tosubmittoclassarbitrationunlessthereisacontractualbasisorconcludingthatthepartyagreedtodoso.TeSupremeCourtwilldeterminewhatcontractualbasissucestoauthorizeclassarbitration.AddrssingthsopofabusinssownrsdutytomaintainanAutomatiextrnalDefbrillatoronthepremises.Verdugov.TargetCorp.caseno.S207313see9thCir.2012704F.3d1044InthisawronguldeathlawsuitledbytheheirsoawomanwhodiedafersueringaheartattackinaargetstorethatdidnothaveanAutomaticExternalDebrillatorAEDthedistrictcourtsummarilydismissedtheactionondutygrounds.PlaintisappealedarguingthatargetsailuretomaintainhadanAEDonthepremisesexposedittoliabilityorcommonlawnegligence.argetarguedthattheLegislatureoccupiedtheeldwithrespecttowhenbusinessesmustmaintainAEDsandargetisnotwithintheclassobusinessesrequiredbystatutetodoso.argeturtherarguedthatitsonlydutyinrespondingtoamedicalemergencyistocall911.woederalappellatejudgesontheNinthCircuitpanelhearingthiscaseopinedthatbecauseplaintissoughttoimposeacommon-lawrulethatwouldrequiremanyretailestablishmentsacrossthestatetoacquireAEDsthequestionposedimplicatesstrongstateinterestsandcouldhavewide-reachingeects.TepanelthuscertiedtheissuetotheCaliorniaSupremeCourt.TeSupremeCourtgrantedreviewonJanuary162013toaddresstheollowingissueInwhatcircumstancesieverdoesthecommonlawdutyoacommercialpropertyownertoprovideemergencyrstaidtoinviteesrequiretheavailabilityoanAutomaticExternalDebrillatorAEDorcasesosuddencardiacarrestAddrssingwhthranamdinsurdspurportdassignmntofliabilityinsuranovragtoaspinoffompanybforlaimsagainstthompanyhavmaturdintoaliquidatdsumrquirsthinsurrsonsnt.FluorCorporationv.SuperiorCourtHartfordAccidentIndemnityCo.caseno.S205889formerlypublishedat208Cal.App.4th1506TisinsurancecoverageactionwasledbyFluorCorporationFluor-2whichisthesecondotwoindependentcorporationsnamedFluorCorporationhavingbeencreatedin2000byareversespinocorporate.TepreexistingFluorCorporationFluor-1hasbeeninexistencesince1924.Between1971and1986HartordAccidentIndemnityCompanyHartordoeredcomprehensiveliabilityinsurancetoFluor-1through11dierentontinudonpagviiiVoume12013erictgreenseetsviiAddrssingthmaningofadvrtisinginjuryinthovraglausofagnralliabilityinsuranpoliy.HartfordCasualtyInsuranceCompanyv.SwiftDistributionInc.caseno.S207172formerlypublishedat210Cal.App.4th915nthisinsurancecoveragedisputetheinsurersliabilitypolicypromisedtodeendtheinsuredSwifagainstlawsuitsthatsoughtdamagesoranadvertisinginjury.Tepolicydenedadvertisinginjuryasaninjuryarisingromthepublicationomaterialthatdisparagesapersonsproduct.Swifwassuedordamagesthatallegedlyresultedromitsadvertisementsandaskedtheinsurertodeendthelawsuit.TeinsurerdeniedcoverageandledadeclaratoryrelieactiontoestablishthatitowednodutytodeendSwif.TetrialcourtgrantedsummaryjudgmentortheinsurerandtheCourtoAppealarmedndingtheSwifadvertisementdidnotdisparagetheproductsotheplaintiintheunderlyinglawsuit.Tecourtheldthatdisparagementrequiresaninjuriousalsehoodwhichspecicallyreerstothederoatedproduct.InthiscaseSwifsadvertisementmadenomentionotheplaintisproduct.InreachinitsholdintheSwifcourtdisareedwiththereasonininTravelersPropertyCasualtyCo.oAmericav.CharlotteRusseHoldingInc.2012207Cal.App.4th969.TeSupremeCourtgrantedreviewonFebruary132013toaddresswhetheranadvertisinginjuryprovisioninageneralliabilitypolicyrequiredtheinsurertoprovideadeenseagainstaclaimthattheinsuredsadvertisementsdisparagedanothercompanysproductwhentheadvertisementscontainednoalsestatementsanddidnotmentiontheothercompanysproduct.AddrssingthsopofourtsrviwofarbitrationawardsandofthhonstblifdfnsundrcaliforniaFamilyRightsAt.Richeyv.AutonationInc.caseno.S207536formerlypublishedat210Cal.App.4th1516TiscaseinvolvesaterminatedemployeesclaimsagainsthisemployerorviolationotheCaliorniaFamilyRightsActCFRAandtheproprietyocourtreviewothesubstanceoanarbitratorsawardresolvinthoseclaims.TearbitratorinthiscaseruledthatbecausetheterminationwasbasedontheemployershonestbeliethattheemployeewasviolatinleavepoliciesbyworkininasecondjobwhileonamilyleavetheemployerwasprotectedaainstliabilityundertheCFRA.Tetrialcourtconrmedtheaward.TeCourtoAppealreversedandvacatedtheawardaferundertakinsubstantivereviewothearbitratorsdecisionandrejectinthehonestbeliedeense.TecourtreliedonPearsonDentalSuppliesInc.v.SuperiorCourt201048Cal.4th665andArmendarizv.FoundationHealthPsychcareServicesInc.200024Cal.4th83assupportorthepropositionthatwhereanarbitratoraddressesclaimsorviolationounwaivablestatutoryrihtstheawardinatleastsomecircumstancesissubjecttodenovojudicialrevieworlealerror.TeSupremeCourtrantedreviewonFebruary132013toaddresstheollowinissues1IsanemployershonestbeliethatanemployeewasviolatincompanypolicyorabusinmedicalleaveacompletedeensetotheemployeesclaimthattheemployerviolatedtheMoore-Brown-RobertiFamilyRihtsActGov.Code12945.112945.22WasthedecisionbelowtovacatethearbitrationawardintheemployersavorconsistentwiththelimitedjudicialreviewoarbitrationawardsSeelsoOxfordHealthPlansLLCv.Suttersee3rdCir.2012675F.3d215theU.S.SupremeCourthasgrantedcertioraritodecideanissuelefopenbyitsearlierdecisioninStolt-NielsenS.A.v.AnimalFeedsInternationalCorp.130S.Ct.17582010whichheldthatundertheFederalArbitrationActapartymaynotbecompelled...tosubmittoclassarbitrationunlessthereisacontractualbasisorconcludingthatthepartyagreedtodoso.TeSupremeCourtwilldeterminewhatcontractualbasissucestoauthorizeclassarbitration.AddrssingthsopofabusinssownrsdutytomaintainanAutomatiextrnalDefbrillatoronthepremises.Verdugov.TargetCorp.caseno.S207313see9thCir.2012704F.3d1044InthisawronuldeathlawsuitledbytheheirsoawomanwhodiedafersuerinaheartattackinaaretstorethatdidnothaveanAutomaticExternalDebrillatorAEDthedistrictcourtsummarilydismissedtheactionondutyrounds.PlaintisappealedaruinthataretsailuretomaintainhadanAEDonthepremisesexposedittoliabilityorcommonlawnelience.aretaruedthattheLeislatureoccupiedtheeldwithrespecttowhenbusinessesmustmaintainAEDsandaretisnotwithintheclassobusinessesrequiredbystatutetodoso.areturtheraruedthatitsonlydutyinrespondintoamedicalemerencyistocall911.woederalappellatejudesontheNinthCircuitpanelhearinthiscaseopinedthatbecauseplaintissouhttoimposeacommon-lawrulethatwouldrequiremanyretailestablishmentsacrossthestatetoacquireAEDsthequestionposedimplicatesstronstateinterestsandcouldhavewide-reachineects.TepanelthuscertiedtheissuetotheCaliorniaSupremeCourt.TeSupremeCourtrantedreviewonJanuary162013toaddresstheollowinissueInwhatcircumstancesieverdoesthecommonlawdutyoacommercialpropertyownertoprovideemerencyrstaidtoinviteesrequiretheavailabilityoanAutomaticExternalDebrillatorAEDorcasesosuddencardiacarrestAddrssingwhthranamdinsurdspurportdassignmntofliabilityinsuranovragtoaspinoffompanybforlaimsagainstthompanyhavmaturdintoaliquidatdsumrquirsthinsurrsonsnt.FluorCorporationv.SuperiorCourtHartfordAccidentIndemnityCo.caseno.S205889formerlypublishedat208Cal.App.4th1506isinsurancecoverageactionwasledbyFluorCorporationFluor-2whichisthesecondotwoindependentcorporationsnamedFluorCorporationhavingbeencreatedin2000byareversespinocorporate.TepreexistingFluorCorporationFluor-1hasbeeninexistencesince1924.Between1971and1986HartordAccidentIndemnityCompanyHartordoeredcomprehensiveliabilityinsurancetoFluor-1through11dierentontinudonpagviii viiiverdictgreensheetsVolume12013insurancepolicies.HartordhasdeendedbothFluor-1andFluor-2inasbestoslawsuitsunderthesepoliciessince1985andbetween2001and2008Hartordhaspaidrelateddeenseandindemnitycosts.InresponsetothelawsuitbyFluor-2Hartordledacross-complaintalleginginpartthatonlyFluor-1wasnamedontheinsurancepoliciesatissueandeachpolicycontainedaconsent-to-assignmentprovisionwhichprohibitedanyassignmentoanyinterestunderthepolicywithoutHartordswrittenconsent.HartordassertedthatitneverwasaskedorandnevergrantedconsentitsoughtadeclarationthatitneitherhadtodeendnorindemniyFluor-2orasbestosclaimsandsoughtreimbursementordeensecostsandindemnitypaymentsalreadymade.Flour-2reliedonInsuranceCodesection520whichpermittedassignmentswithorwithoutinsurerconsentaertherelevantlossoccurredtoarguetheconsentclausewasvoid.Fluor-2assertedthatthelossesatissueoccurredatleast15yearsbeorethereversespinoin2000.HartordreliedonHenkelCorp.v.HartfordAccidentIndemnityCo.200329Cal.4th934whichheldthatsuchconsent-to-assignmentclauseswerevalidandenorceableuntilthelossmaturedintoaliquidatedsum.TetrialcourtagreedwithHartordthatHenkelprecludedsummaryadjudicationorFluor-2onthecoverageissue.TeCourtoAppealFourthDist.Div.TreeconsideredtheissueinwritproceedingsandarmedthetrialcourtsrulingholdingthatithadneitherthepowernortheinclinationtoreverseHenkel.Teconsent-to-assignmentclauseatissuewasidenticaltothatinHenkelandthemereactthattheeventsgivingrisetoliabilityexposuretoasbestosoccurredbeorethereversespinodoesnotautomaticallyexpandHartordscoveragetobothFluor-1andFluor-2.InsuranceCodesection520wasnotdiscussedinHenkelbutthecourtoappealoundnolikelihoodthattheSupremeCourtwouldhavereachedadierentresultinHenkelitheapplicabilityothestatutehadbeenbrieedorargued.TeSupremeCourtgrantedreviewonDecember122012toaddresstheollowingissueArethelimitationsonassignmentothirdpartyliabilityinsurancepolicybenetsrecognizedinHenkelCorp.v.HartfordAccidentIndemnityCo.200329Cal.4th934inconsistentwiththeprovisionsoInsuranceCodesection520Addressingterminatedemployeesrighttounemploymentinsurancebenefts.ParatransitInc.v.UnemploymentInsuranceAppealsBoardMedeiroscaseno.S204221formerlypublishedat206Cal.App.4th1319UnemploymentInsuranceCodesection1256disqualiesanemployeeromreceivingunemploymentcompensationbenetsiheorshehasbeendischargedormisconduct.Misconductinvolvesawillulorwantondisregardoanemployersinterestsorsuchcarelessnessornegligenceastomaniestequalculpability.Itdoesnotincludeamongotherthingsgoodaitherrorsinjudgment.WhereaterminatedemployeereusedtosignadisciplinarymemoranduminconnectionwithanincidentomisconductthetrialcourtoverturningapriorrulingbytheUnemploymentInsuranceAppealsBoardgrantedawritoadministrativemandamusndingthatreusalconstitutedwork-relatedmisconductratherthanagood-aitherrorinjudgmentrenderingtheemployeeineligibleorunemploymentcompensation.TeCourtoAppealTirdDist.armed.TeSupremeCourtgrantedreviewonJuly242012toaddresstheollowingissueDidthetrialcourtproperlyndthatemployeemisconductwithinthemeaningoAmadorv.UnemploymentIns.AppealsBd.198435Cal.3d671disqualiedadischargedemployeeromreceivingunemploymentinsurancebenetsAddressingexhaustionofremediesdoctrineinthecontextofadoctorslawsuitarisingoutofanadversehospitalpeerreviewruling.Fahlenv.SutterCenterValleyHospitalscaseno.S205568formerlypublishedat208Cal.App.4th557Teplaintidoctorsuedahospitalthatdeclinedtorenewthedoctorsmedicalstaprivilegestoseepatientsatthathospital.Tehospitalsdecisionhadbeenupheldbythehospitalsboardotrusteesaerinternalpeerreviewproceedings.Tedoctordidnotseekjudicialreviewothatadministrativedecisionhowever.InsteadheledatortactionunderHealthandSaetyCodesection1278.5seekingrelieasawhistleblowerclaimingthathisprivilegesweredeniedinretaliationorcomplaintsaboutnursingissues.TeCourtoAppealFihDist.heldthatatortactionundersection1278.5mayproceedindependentomedicalstapeerreviewproceedings.TisresultconfictedwiththerulinginNeesonv.NorthInyoCountyLocalHospitalDist.2012204Cal.App.4th65.TeSupremeCourtgrantedreviewonSeptember242012toaddresstheollowingquestionMustaphysicianobtainajudgmentthroughmandamusreviewsettingasideahospitalsdecisiontoterminatethephysiciansprivilegespriortopursuingawhistleblowerretaliationactionunderHealthandSaetyCodesection1278.5Addressingmeaningofprevailingpartyforpurposesofcontractualattorneyfeeawards.KandyKissofCaliforniaInc.v.Tex-EllentInc.caseno.S206354formerlypublishedat209Cal.App.4th604TetrialcourtinthiscaseawardedcontractualattorneyeesunderCivilCode1717toadeendantwhoobtainedadismissalduetolackosubjectmatterjurisdictionndingthedeendantsubstantiallyprevailedwithinthemeaningostatelawdeningprevailingparties.TeCourtoAppealarmedndingthatthepartiescontracttermusingadierentdenitionthatincludedonewhosubstantiallyobtainsordeeatsthereliesoughtthroughmeansdierentromthosebywhichthedeendantprevaileddidnotprecludeapplicationothecommonlawdenitionoprevailingparty.Moreoverthecourtoundtheplaintiwhohadsuedonthecontractwasestoppedtorelyonarulinginarelatedproceedingndingthatnocontractexisted.TeSupremeCourtgrantedreviewonJanuary162013toaddresstheollowingissueIsapartywhoobtainsthedismissaloacontractactionentirelyonproceduralgroundsentitledtoanawardoattorneyeesunderCivilCodesection1717astheprevailingpartyinanactiononacontractcontinuedfrompageviiiiierictgreenseetsVoume12013insurancepolicies.HartordhasdeendedbothFluor-1andFluor-2inasbestoslawsuitsunderthesepoliciessince1985andbetween2001and2008Hartordhaspaidrelateddeenseandindemnitycosts.InresponsetothelawsuitbyFluor-2Hartordledacross-complaintalleginginpartthatonlyFluor-1wasnamedontheinsurancepoliciesatissueandeachpolicycontainedaconsent-to-assignmentprovisionwhichprohibitedanyassignmentoanyinterestunderthepolicywithoutHartordswrittenconsent.HartordassertedthatitneverwasaskedorandnevergrantedconsentitsoughtadeclarationthatitneitherhadtodeendnorindemniyFluor-2orasbestosclaimsandsoughtreimbursementordeensecostsandindemnitypaymentsalreadymade.Flour-2reliedonInsuranceCodesection520whichpermittedassignmentswithorwithoutinsurerconsentaertherelevantlossoccurredtoarguetheconsentclausewasvoid.Fluor-2assertedthatthelossesatissueoccurredatleast15yearsbeorethereversespinoin2000.HartordreliedonHenkelCorp.v.HartfordAccidentIndemnityCo.200329Cal.4th934whichheldthatsuchconsent-to-assignmentclauseswerevalidandenorceableuntilthelossmaturedintoaliquidatedsum.TetrialcourtagreedwithHartordthatHenkelprecludedsummaryadjudicationorFluor-2onthecoverageissue.TeCourtoAppealFourthDist.Div.TreeconsideredtheissueinwritproceedingsandarmedthetrialcourtsrulingholdingthatithadneitherthepowernortheinclinationtoreverseHenkel.Teconsent-to-assignmentclauseatissuewasidenticaltothatinHenkelandthemereactthattheeventsgivingrisetoliabilityexposuretoasbestosoccurredbeorethereversespinodoesnotautomaticallyexpandHartordscoveragetobothFluor-1andFluor-2.InsuranceCodesection520wasnotdiscussedinHenkelbutthecourtoappealoundnolikelihoodthattheSupremeCourtwouldhavereachedadierentresultinHenkeitheapplicabilityothestatutehadbeenbrieedorargued.TeSupremeCourtgrantedreviewonDecember122012toaddresstheollowingissueArethelimitationsonassignmentothirdpartyliabilityinsurancepolicybenetsrecognizedinHenkelCorp.v.HartfordAccidentIndemnityCo.200329Cal.4th934inconsistentwiththeprovisionsoInsuranceCodesection520Addressingterminatedemployeesrighttounemploymentinsurancebenefts.ParatransitInc.v.UnemploymentInsuranceAppealsBoardMedeiroscaseno.S204221formerlypublishedat206Cal.App.4th1319UnemploymentInsuranceCodesection1256disqualiesanemployeeromreceivingunemploymentcompensationbenetsiheorshehasbeendischargedormisconduct.Misconductinvolvesawillulorwantondisregardoanemployersinterestsorsuchcarelessnessornegligenceastomaniestequalculpability.Itdoesnotincludeamongotherthingsgoodaitherrorsinjudgment.WhereaterminatedemployeereusedtosignadisciplinarymemoranduminconnectionwithanincidentomisconductthetrialcourtoverturningapriorrulingbytheUnemploymentInsuranceAppealsBoardgrantedawritoadministrativemandamusndingthatreusalconstitutedwork-relatedmisconductratherthanagood-aitherrorinjudgmentrenderingtheemployeeineligibleorunemploymentcompensation.TeCourtoAppealTirdDist.armed.TeSupremeCourtgrantedreviewonJuly242012toaddresstheollowingissueDidthetrialcourtproperlyndthatemployeemisconductwithinthemeaningoAmadorv.UnemploymentIns.AppealsBd.198435Cal.3d671disqualiedadischargedemployeeromreceivingunemploymentinsurancebenetsAddressingexhaustionofremediesdoctrineinthecontextofadoctorslawsuitarisingoutofanadversehospitalpeerreviewruling.Fahlenv.SutterCenterValleyHospitalscaseno.S205568formerlypublishedat208Cal.App.4th557eplaintidoctorsuedahospitalthatdeclinedtorenewthedoctorsmedicalstaprivilegestoseepatientsatthathospital.Tehospitalsdecisionhadbeenupheldbythehospitalsboardotrusteesaerinternalpeerreviewproceedins.Tedoctordidnotseekjudicialreviewothatadministrativedecisionhowever.InsteadheledatortactionunderHealthandSaetyCodesection1278.5seekinrelieasawhistleblowerclaiminthathisprivileesweredeniedinretaliationorcomplaintsaboutnursinissues.TeCourtoAppealFihDist.heldthatatortactionundersection1278.5mayproceedindependentomedicalstapeerreviewproceedins.isresultconfictedwiththerulininNeesonv.NorthInyoCountyLocalHospitalDist.2012204Cal.App.4th65.eSupremeCourtrantedreviewonSeptember242012toaddresstheollowinquestionMustaphysicianobtainajudmentthrouhmandamusreviewsettinasideahospitalsdecisiontoterminatethephysiciansprivileespriortopursuinawhistleblowerretaliationactionunderHealthandSaetyCodesection1278.5Addressingmeaningofprevailingpartyforpurposesofcontractualattorneyfeeawards.KandyKissofCaliforniaInc.v.Tex-EllentInc.caseno.S206354formerlypublishedat209Cal.App.4th604etrialcourtinthiscaseawardedcontractualattorneyeesunderCivilCode1717toadeendantwhoobtainedadismissalduetolackosubjectmatterjurisdictionndingthedeendantsubstantiallyprevailedwithinthemeaningostatelawdeningprevailingparties.eCourtoAppealarmedndingthatthepartiescontracttermusingadierentdenitionthatincludedonewhosubstantiallyobtainsordeeatsthereliesoughtthroughmeansdierentromthosebywhichthedeendantprevaileddidnotprecludeapplicationothecommonlawdenitionoprevailingparty.Moreoverthecourtoundtheplaintiwhohadsuedonthecontractwasestoppedtorelyonarulinginarelatedproceedingndingthatnocontractexisted.eSupremeCourtgrantedreviewonJanuary162013toaddresstheollowingissueIsapartywhoobtainsthedismissaloacontractactionentirelyonproceduralgroundsentitledtoanawardoattorneyeesunderCivilCodesection1717astheprevailingpartyinanactiononacontractcontinuedfrompagevii Volume12013verdict21TheSupremeCourtrecentlydeniedarequestbytheConsumerAttorneysoCaliorniatodepublishInreInsuranceInstallmentFeeCases21CalApp.4th1395.Tisbrienoteexplainsabitabouttheunderlyingcaseandcribsliberallyromoursuccessulamicusbrie.WhileIstrivetomaintainaneutrallawyerlytoneImuststartbynotingwithgleetheendresult.Tecasestartedasaplaintifslawyersdreamhugeclassactionlawsuitagainstbigbadinsurancecompanywheretheinsurancecompanywasorcedtopayordiscoverynoticethatwouldallowtheplaintiftomineoradditionalclassmembers.Itendedasaplaintifslawyersnightmarenotonlywasthecasedismissedwhenthedemurrerwasupheldbutover700000innoticecostswereassignedtotheplaintif.INREINSuRANCEINStALLMENtCASEStHEuNDERLyINGCASETecaseInreInsuranceInstallmentFeeCases21CalApp.4th1395heldthatinsurancecompanyStateFarmcouldchargea1to3servicechargetocustomerswhopaidtheirinsurancepremiumseverymonthratherthaninonelumpsumatthebeginningotheinsurancecontract.TecourtheldthattheserviceeewasnotaninsurancepremiumandthatchargingitwasInreInsuranceInstallmentCasesOpt-OutNoticetoPunitiveClassMemberstoBePaidByPlaintifsByKimStoneCJACnotunlawulunderanyotheplaintifstheoriesbreachocontractraudnegligentmisrepresentationorunaircompetition.Tecourtalsoheldthatthe700000dollarsthatthetrialcourtrequiredStateFarmtospendnotiyingitscustomersthatStateFarmwouldsharecustomercontactinormationandinstallmenteepaymentinormationwiththeplaintifswasanabuseodiscretionbythetrialcourtandshouldinsteadbeproperlypaidbytheplaintifs.StateFarmpolicyholdershadanexpectationoprivacyrequiredbothbylawandbycourtorderwarrantinganopt-innoticebeoretheircontactandpaymentinormationwouldbesharedwithplaintifs.TecourtdistinguishedPioneerElectronicsUSAInc.v.SuperiorCourt40Cal.4th3602007acasewherethejudgealloweddisclosureocontactinormationoDVDbuyerswhohadcomplainedtothesellerthattheproductwasdeective.KRALOWECFORCONSuMERAttORNEySREQuEStINGDEPuBLICAtIONKimberlyKralowecoKralowecLawandtheUCLpractitionerblogpetitionedtheCaliorniaSupremeCourtonbehalotheplaintifslawyerlobbyingorganizationordepublicationoInreInsuranceInstallmentFeeCases.TeirargumentwasthatthecasewascontrarytoPioneerElectronicswhichheldthatthetrialcourthasthediscretiontodetermineinoticeisrequiredtopotentialclassmembers.KralowecsbrielamentsTeopinionusedinaccurateandoverbroadlanguagethatcouldleadtoanerosionothisCourtsholdinginPioneerElectronicsbysteeringtrialcourtstoconcludethatopt-outnoticesarerequiredineveryclassactioncaseinwhichcontactinormationissoughtindiscovery.TeopinioncouldleadthosecourtstoabandontheweighingprocessthatPioneerElectronicsmandates.CJACANDOtHERSOPPOSEREQuESttODEPuBLISHFredHiestandwritingortheCivilJusticeAssociationoCaliorniatheCaliorniaBusinessRoundtabletheCaliorniaChamberoCommerceandtheCaliorniaBankersAssociationurgedtheCourtnottodepublishtheopinion.Amiciareinterestedinensuringthattheinalienableconstitutionalrighttoprivacyopotentialclassmeasuresisaccordedadequateprotectionromdisclosuretocontinuedonpage22 22verdictVolume12013thirdpartynamedplaintifsinaputativeclassactionlawsuit.TeyarguedthatthecasealongwithPioneerprovidesclariyingguidanceorcourtsandcounselinutureclasscerticationsconcerningthescopeodiscoverablepersonalandnancialinormationimplicatingindividualprivacyrights.DIStINGuISHINGPIONEERELECTRONICSPioneerElectronicsholdsthatthenamedplaintifinaputativeclassactionagainstaselleroallegedlydeectiveDVDplayersisentitledtodiscoverthenamesandaddressesocustomerswhosubmittedpreviouscomplaintstothesellerabouttheDVDplayersunlessollowingpropernoticetothemtheyregisteredawrittenobjectiontothedisclosureotheircontactinormation.PioneerElectronicssupra40Cal.4that374.Inotherwordsthepotentialclassmemberswereentitledtoreceiveonlyopt-outnoticeinpartbecausetheclassmembershadalreadyprovideddeendantswiththeirnameandcomplaintwhentheycomplainedtothesellerabouttheallegedlydeectiveDVDplayer.InInreInsuranceInstallmentcasesplaintifssoughtdiscoveryocontactinormationandnancialpaymenthistoriesoindividualinsurancepolicyholdersastowhomplaintifsclassactionclaimedtheywerebeingchargedundisclosedserviceeesinviolationothelaw.IncontrasttoPioneerElectronicstherewasnoallegationinInreInsuranceInstallmentcasesthatanypotentialclassmemberpreviouslynotieddeendantinsurerstheyobjectedtotheundisclosedserviceees.TeappellatecourtordereddeendantStateFarmtodisclosethisinormationprovidedspeciednoticeandopportunitytoobjectopt-inwasgiventopolicyholders.StateFarmcompliedwiththetrialcourtsorderandthensoughtrecoveryothenoticecostsitincurredwhichexceeded700000.TetrialcourtdisallowedrecoveryothesecostsandtheappellateopinionreversedndingthatthenoticeprocedureStateFarmusedwasrequiredbylawandcourtorder.wodiferentkindsoinormationweresoughtthroughdiscovery1namesandaddressesorcontactinormationthatPioneerElectronicsconsideredand2nancialpaymenthistoryinormationnotconsideredbyPioneerElectronics.TerstkindoinormationthecontactinormationisanalogoustotheinormationconsideredinPioneerElectronics.HoweverthenancialpaymenthistoryinormationissubstantivelydiferentromtheinormationsoughtinPioneer.InreInsuranceCasesheldthatthenancialpaymenthistoryinormationisabsentacompellingstateinterestprotectedromdisclosurebytheCaliorniaConstitution.211Cal.App.4th1428-1429.Whiletheappellateopinionrecognizesthereleaseothepolicyholdersidentiyinginormationtoplaintifs...wasnotaseriousinvasionotheirprivacyitwassucientlyinvasivetowarrantprovidingthemnoticeandanopportunitytoobjectinthesamemannerasPioneerElectronicsprovidedanopt-outnotice.211Cal.App.4that1428.MoreoverInreInsuranceInstallmentCasesexplainsthatevenithetrialcourtinthereasonableexerciseoitsdiscretionarguablycouldhaveallowedthediscoveryothepolicyholderscontactinormationwithouttheopt-innoticesought...noticetopolicyholdersandanopportunitytoobjectunquestionablyisrequiredorplaintifsrequesteddiscoveryothepolicyholders...paymenthistoryinormation.Id.TustwoormsonoticetoputativeclassmembersinthiscasewereprescribedortwodiferentcategoriesoinormationtheresultobalancingcomparativeprivacyinterestsimplicatedbyclassactioncerticationthatPioneerElectronicsoundbettingocourtsanopt-outnoticeorinitialcontactinormationi.e.namesandaddressesandanopt-innoticeorcondentialnancialpaymenthistoriesoindividualpolicyholders.tWICEASNICECONStItutIONALPRIVACyANDFOLLOWINGACOuRtORDERAnotherwrinkletheInsuranceInstallmentopinionpresentsdiferentromPioneerElectronicsisitsndingthatthenoticerequiredorprotectionoindividualprivacyisbasedontwoindependentgroundstheconstitutionalrightoprivacyrecognizedbyPioneerElectronicsandconstructionothecourtorderdirectingtheormonoticesStateFarmwasrequiredtoprovidepolicyholders.TerewasnoconstructionoacourtorderinvolvedinPioneerElectronics.Teordertherenotiedcomplainingcustomerstheircontactinormationwouldbeprovidedtoplaintifunlesstheyarmativelyobjectedtoitsreleaseanopt-outprovision.PioneerElectronicssupra40Ca1.4that366.ButInsuranceInstallmentCasesalsoanalyzesthetextothetrialcourtsorderandndsitsdirectivethatpolicyholdersbegivenopt-innoticeregardingdisclosureotheirserviceeepaymentinormationcompellingotheconclusionthattheorderrequirednoticetothepolicyholders...211Cal.App.4that1430.oconstruethetrialcourtsorderasoptionalorStateFarminthemannerurgedbyplaintifswouldtheopinionexplainsbeillogicalbecauseithenoticewasmerelypermissivethenpolicyholderswouldhavehadtoopt-outratherthanopt-in.Id.at1430-1431.TeInsuranceInstallmentCasesconstructionothetrialcourtsorderanditsexplanationowhythatorderasamatterolawrequiredStateFarmtoprovidethespeciednoticetoitspolicyholdersentitlesStateFarmtorecoverromplaintifsthemorethan700000incostsitincurredincomplyingwiththeorder.CONCLuSIONWhenyoucombineInreInsuranceInstallmentFeeCaseswithPioneerElectronicsyougetagoodexplanationowhatkindoinormationrequiresonlyopt-outnoticecontactinormationonlyandwhatkindoinormationrequiresopt-innoticenancialpaymentinormation.AdditionallythecourtsexplanationintheInsuranceInstallmentCasesowhoshouldbeartheburdenopayingorthatnoticeshouldproveuseultodeenseattorneysinclassactioncases.InsuranceInstallmentscontinuedfrompage21 Volume12013verdict23ASCDCsAmicusCommitteemonitorsappellatedecisionsthataectthepracticeolaw.AndinappropriatecasesourvolunteermembersothecommitteeincludingpastASCDCPresidentHarryChamberlainweighinonthosecasestopresentaviewpointconsistentwiththechargeoourAssociationtopromotetheadministrationojusticeandenhancethestandardsocivillitigationandtrialpracticeinthisState.InonerecentdecisionRickleyv.Goodfiend2013212Cal.App.4th1136themajorityheldoverastrongandwellreasoneddissentthatanattorneyowesanadversarialpartyanindependentdutynottointererewithajudgmententeredagainsttheattorneysownclient.InanamicuscuriaelettersupportingthedeendantattorneyspetitionorreviewChamberlainobservedheRickleymajoritysuggestedthata1991legislativeamendmentothescreeningstatuteapplicabletoallegedlawyer-conspiracyclaimsCivilCodesection1714.10hadsomehowrenderedthatsalutaryprocessdead-letter.Section1714.10isaLegislativegatekeeperscreeningprovisionthatrequirestheplaintiseekingtosueanattorneyorcivilconspiracytoinitiallydemonstrateareasonableprobabilityoprevailingonthemerits.HoweveraccordingtotheRickleymajorityscreeningisnolongerrequiredandthebroadscopeoCaliorniasabsolutelitigationprivilegecanbeabrogatedwhenevertheplaintimerelyassertsthattheopposinglawyeractedoranimproperpurposeunrelatedtothelawsuitorowedanindependentlegaldutynottoinjuretheplaintisinterestsunderajudgmentorpost-judgmentorder.ForyourreadingpleasurebelowisthelegalargumentromChamberlainsamicusletterexplainingwhytheCaliorniaSupremeCourtshouldgrantreviewtoresolvetheuncertaintyinthelawontheissuesraisedinRickley.IreviewisgrantedASCDCcanbeproudtohavebeenpartothatprocess.AndireviewisnotgrantedChamberlainsletteroutlinesargumentsthatattorneyscanborrowtodemonstratewhyRickleyconfictswiththeleadingSupremeCourtprecedentinthisareaDoctorsCo.v.SuperiorCourt198949Cal.3d39andshouldnotbeollowedinuturecases.EditorsNoteTepetitionorreviewwasdeniedasthisissuewenttoprint.Rickleyv.GoodfiendaNewOpinionthatExpandsLawyersLiabilityandWhatASCDCIsDoingAboutItIntroductionbyLisaPerrochetAccordingtothemajorityscharacterizationotheallegedconspiracyInthisdisputebetweennext-doorneighborsplaintisprevailedinaprioractionestablishingthattheirneighborMarvinGoodriendhadunlawullydumpedcontaminateddebrisontheirproperty.Judgmentwasenteredorplaintis.Thejudgmentrequiredtheneighbortoremovethedebrispursuanttoacourt-approvedremediationplan.Theundsortheremediationplanwereplacedinthetrustaccountotheneighborsattorneysthelawyer-deendantsatProcterrepresentingMarvinGoodriendandhiswie.Theneighborailedtoremovethecontaminateddebrisandtheattorneysdisbursedtheundsinamannercontrarytoplaintisinterestinremediatingthedebrisontheirproperty.PlaintisthenfledthisactionallegingthattheneighborMarvinGoodriendandhiswiehadnotcompliedwiththepriorjudgmentresultinginacontinuingnuisance.Maj.opn.atp.2bracketadded.AterthejudgmentplaintisamendedtheirpleadingstosuethelawyersatProcterorallegedlyconspiringwiththeGoodriendstointererewiththecourt-approvedremediationplanandtodisbursetheundsromthetrustaccountsoastoavoidremediatingthecontaminateddebrisonplaintisproperty.Thetrialcourtallowedtheamendment.Ibid.seealsoid.atpp.910.SpecifcallyeachoclaimsoconspiracyliabilityassertedagainstProcterwaspremiseduponthenotionthattheREASONSWHYREVIEWSHOULDBEGRANTEDcontinuedonpage24 24verdictVolume12013Rickleyv.Goodfiendcontinuedfrompage23AttorneyDeendantsandeachothemormedandoperatedaconspiracywiththeirclientsintendedtowithoutlimitationthwartcompliancewithPlaintisJudgmentandpostjudgmentorders.Maj.opn.atp.9bracketsintheoriginaltext.ThreenewcausesoactionwerealsoallegedagainstthelawyersortheGoodriendsinvolvingdutiesostensiblyowedtotheplaintisaterthejudgment1breachofduciaryduty2negligenceand3accounting.Id.at10.Forsoundpolicyreasonstherecognizeddutiesgivingrisetoacivilcauseoactionthatmaybeassertedbyadversariesinlitigationagainstopposingcounselareewandarbetween.Undermostcircumstancesanattorneysdutydependsontheexistenceoanattorney-clientrelationshipIthatrelationshipdoesnotexistthefduciarydutytoaclientdoesnotarise.Thayerv.KabateckBrownKellnerLLP2012207Cal.App.4th141161ThayercitingDanielsv.DeSimone199313Cal.App.4th600607accordChangv.Lederman2009172Cal.App.4th6782-83.ApplyingtheseprinciplesthecourtshaveobservedthatWearewaryaboutextendinganattorneysdutytopersonswhohavenotcometotheattorneyseekinglegaladviceoradversarieswithwhomtheattorneydealsatarms-lengthasinvirtuallyeverylitigationcontext.Hallv.SuperiorCourt2003108Cal.App.4th706714seealsoChangv.Ledermansupra72Cal.App.4thatpp.82-83describingthelimitednatureodutiesowedbyattorneystothirdpartiesandrejectingtheexpansionothirdpartybenefciaryclaims1Thayersupra207Cal.App.4that157-161digestingcasesanddismissingraudandbreachofduciarydutyclaimsassertedbyanon-clientagainstlitigationattorneysorconductinrepresentingtheiractualclients.Thethresholdordemonstratinganactionabledutyagainstalawyerduringthecourseorepresentingclientswhoareopposingclaimsinlitigationatanystageotheproceedingsismuchhigher.ThatisparticularlytrueinlightothepoliciesunderlyingtheabsolutelitigationprivilegeandthatispreciselytherolethatProcterwasservingonbehalotheGoodriendsthroughouttheunderlyingrealestatelitigation.Whilethemajoritybarelypayslipservicetosubstantialpolicyinterestsunderlyingthelitigationprivilegemaj.opn.atpp.26-30itdoesacknowledgethatThelitigationprivilege...servesbroadgoalsoguaranteeingaccesstothejudicialprocesspromotingthezealousrepresentationbycounselotheirclientsandreinorcingthetraditionalunctionothetrialastheengineorthedeterminationotruth.Applyingthelitigationprivilegetosomeormsounlawullitigation-relatedactivitymayadvancethosebroadgoalsnotwithstandingtheoccasionalunairresultinanindividualcase.ThelitigationprivilegeappliestosubornationoperjurybecauseitisinthenatureoastatutoryprivilegethatitmustdenyacivilrecoveryorimmediatewrongssometimesevenseriousandtroublingonesinordertoaccomplishwhattheLegislatureperceivesasagreatergood.Flatleyv.Mauro200639Cal.4th299324.Insumthepurposeothelitigationprivilegeistoensurereeaccesstothecourtspromotecompleteandtruthultestimonyencouragezealousadvocacygivefnalitytojudgmentsandavoidunendinglitigation.Feldmanv.1100ParkLaneAssociates2008160Cal.App.4th14671496.Maj.opn.atp.30.Theprivilegeisnotlimitedtostatementsmadeduringatrialorotherproceedingsbutmayextendtostepstakenpriortheretoorafterwards.BecausetheallegedmisconductisallreasonablyrelatedtotheunderlyingrealestatelitigationbetweentheGoodriendsandtheirneighborsitissubjecttothelitigationprivilegebar.Kearneyv.FoleyLardnerLLP9thCir.2009582F.3d896908909emphasisadded.ThusinRusheenv.Cohen200637Cal.4th1048Rusheenthiscourtappliedtheabsoluteprivilegetodismisstortclaimsassertedagainstanattorneywhoprocuredadeectivedeaultjudgmentbymeansotheperjureddeclarationoaprocessserverandthereaterengagedinconducte.g.levyingandexecutingonthepatentlyvoidjudgmentateritsentryagainsuborningperjurywhenheopposedthemotiontovacatethejudgment.Id.atpp.1053-1054.ThemajorityarguesthatRusheenisdistinguishablebecausethiscourtappliedthelitigationprivilegetopostjudgmentenforcementactivitiesbutinthiscasetheProcterdeendantswereobstructingratherthanenforcingajudgment.Maj.opn.atpp.28-29.Thedissentpersuasivelyrespondsthatthedierencebetweenenorcementandobstructionhoweverisotenintheeyeothebeholder.Dis.opn.atp.36.Themajorityoersadistinctionwithoutamaterialdierence.Itsreasoningisbaseduponthealsepremisethattheprivilegeshouldbeinapplicablebecausethelawyersallegedconductandcommunicationsollowingtheentryojudgmentwerenotundertakentoachievetheobjectsothelitigation.Maj.opn.atp.29.Theapplicationotheprivilegeisnotdependentuponthelabelplacedupontheplaintislawsuitorthemotiveattributedtothelawyersinrepresentingtheirclients.AsthiscourtinstructedinSilbergv.Anderson199050Cal.3d205214theendorsementosuchasubjectiveinterestojusticerequirementwouldbetantamounttotheexclusionoalltortiouspublicationsromtheprivilegebecausetortiousconductisinvariablyinimicaltotheinterestojustice.Thustheexceptionwouldsubsumetherule.Secondemphasisadded.continuedonpage25 Volume12013verdict25Rickleyv.Goodfiendcontinuedfrompage24TheallegedlyunethicalorimpropercharacterotheactsorcommunicationscomplainedoinnowayabrogatestheabsolutenatureotheprivilegeWhileonemightbelievethecommunicationsethicallyunacceptableweconcludethepresentderivativecausesoactionwerebasedsolelyoncommunicativeactsdoneinajudicialproceedingbylitigantstoachievetheobjectsolitigationandhadalogicalrelationtotheaction.Kupiecv.AmericanInternat.AdjustmentCo.1991235Cal.App.3d132613311332.TheprivilegeisabsolutenotbecausewedesiretoprotecttheshadypractitionerbutbecausewedonotwantthehonestonetohavetobeconcernedwithsubsequentderivativeactionslikeRickleysconspiracylawsuit.Silbergsupra50Cal.3datp.214bracketsintheoriginaltextaccordRubinsupra4Cal.4thatp.1202c.dis.opn.atpp.36-39.IllustratingthebroadscopeothelitigationprivilegeinacaseinvolvingprovenattorneymisconductisKachigv.Boothe197122Cal.App.3d626writtenbyJusticeKaumanalsotheauthoroSilbergwhileontheCourtoAppeal.InKachiganattorneynamedJoneswasconvictedosubornationoperjuryandoeringalseevidenceinapriorlawsuitJonesbroughtagainsttheKachigs.Id.atpp.630631seealsoPeoplev.Jones1967254Cal.App.2d200.JoneswassuspendedromthepracticeolawbythiscourtorhispartinanillegalconspiracywithhisclientstomanuacturealseevidencebecausehehadcommittedcrimesomoralturpitudeinviolationoBusinessProessionsCodesection6068.SeeInReJones19715Cal.3d390400.AlthougheachotheseegregiousactshadalreadybeenproveninthecriminalcaseKachigconcludedthattheconductoJonesandhisclientsremainedprivilegedromcivilliabilityunderormersubdivision2osection47Werecognizethatthewronginthiscaseisamostgrievousoneandweshouldbegladtoredressitiarulecouldbedevisedthatwouldremedytheevilwithoutproducingmischiesarworse.Kachigsupra22Cal.App.3datpp.641-642emphasisaddedfrstbracketsinoriginaltext.Numerousothercasessupporttheviewthatevenallegedlyunethicalorillegalconductinurtheranceolitigationthatmightbelabeledasconspiracynonethelessremainprivilegedundersection47.Seee.g.Pettittv.Levy197228Cal.App.3d484491orgeryandsubornationoperjuryCardenv.Getzo1987190Cal.App.3d907915-916expertallegedlygaveperjuredtestimonyandmanuacturedalseevidenceseealsoSilbergsupra50Cal.3datpp.218219Scalzov.Baker2010185Cal.App.4th91101102.Howeverimmunityromtortliabilitydoesnotmeanthatpartiesorattorneyswhoengageinconductpunishablebylawwillgoscot-ree.Criminalandadministrativesanctionsremainavailableincaseswhereorpublicpolicyreasonstheprivilegeoperatestobaranycivilremedy.SeeRusheensupra37Cal.4thatpp.10631064Rubinsupra4Cal.4thatpp.11981199Cedars-SinaiMedicalCenterv.SuperiorCourt199818Cal.4th113nontortremediesorspoliationoevidenceandobstructionojusticearebothextensiveandapparentlyeective.Inrejectingthenecessityoestablishingtortliabilityorspoliationoevidenceorothermisconductamountingtoobstructionojusticethiscourtweighedthesocialbeneftsocreatingatortcauseoaction...againstthecostsandburdensitwouldimpose.Rusheensupra37Cal.4thatp.1063.Weconcludedthatthebeneftsocreatingatortremedyorintentionalfrstpartyorthirdpartyspoliationwereoutweighedby1thepolicyagainstcreatingderivativetortremediesorlitigation-relatedmisconduct2thestrengthoexistingnontortremediesorspoliationwithintheunderlyingactionitselratherthanthroughanexpansionotheopportunitiesorinitiatingoneormoreadditionalroundsolitigationaterthefrstactionhasbeenconcludedand3theuncertaintyotheactoharminspoliationcases.Ibid.citingCedars-SinaiMedicalCentersupra18Cal.4thatpp.89111315frstpartyspoliationbythelitigantsthemselvesseealsoTempleCommunityHospitalv.SuperiorCourt199920Cal.4th464469471thirdpartyspoliationbyattorneyswitnessesandotherparticipantstoapendingoranticipatedlawsuit.ForexampleiapartywillullyviolatesacourtorderthatobstructsorimpairstherightsoanopposingpartyacitationorcontemptocourtisavailablearemedyimposedagainstMr.GoodriendateranOSCfledbyplaintis.Maj.opn.atp.9.Theallegationoconspiracyamongthedeendantstodotheprivilegedactsdoesnotremovetheprivilege.Pettittv.Levysupra28Cal.App.3datp.491.ThosesamepolicyconsiderationspertaintothelimitationsrecognizedbyDoctorsCo.ontheundueexpansionotortliabilityorallegedlawyer-conspiracy.DoctorsCo.supra49Cal.3datp.43noviableclaimorconspiracytosubornalsemedicalopinion.TheLegislaturesenactmentoCivilCodesection1714.10andthecontrollingprecedentsothiscourtamplydemonstratethatlawyer-conspiracyaredisavoredandliberalrulesopleadinghavenoplacewhenevaluatingtheviabilityosuchclaims.Seedis.opn.atp.37.Section1714.10wasoriginallyenactedin1988inresponsetotheCourtoAppealsdecisioninWolfrichCorp.v.UnitedServicesAutomobileAssn.1983149Cal.App.3d1206whichheldthatalthoughaninsurancecompanysattorneyscouldnotbesueddirectlyorviolatingInsuranceCodesection790.03theycouldbesuedorconspiringwiththeirclienttocommitunairordeceptiveactsorpracticesintheresolutionoinsurancedisputes.Itspurposeistopreventtheassertionoconspiracyclaimsagainstattorneysasatacticalployagainstanadversaryscontinuedonpage26 26verdictVolume12013Rickleyv.Goodfiendcontinuedfrompage25counsel.Asenactedsection1714.10requiredapreflingjudicialdeterminationoprobablemeritoranyclaimagainstanattorneyallegingtheattorneyhadconspiredwithhisorherclientakintothespecialmotiontostrikeorcasesarisingromconstitutionallyprotectedpetitioningandspeechactivityCodeCiv.Proc.425.16itsprovisionswereintendedtoscreenoutmeritlesscasesatanearlystagebyrequiringtheplaintitodemonstrateaprobabilityosuccessonthemerits.Maj.opn.atpp.1213.Ataminimumsection1714.10contemplatestherearetwosidestoeverystoryandthecourtsmustactasgatekeepersinevaluatingthepotentialmeritsolawyer-conspiracyclaims.ButaccordingtothemajoritytheactsallegedagainstthelawyerscanbeconstruedinonlyonewayHavingrepresentedtheGoodriendsinthefrstactionandlostProctershouldhavelettheremediationworktoothersdirectedbyanexpertspecifcallyplaintisexpert...andstayedawayromattemptingtoresolveanycontinuingdisputesontheGoodriendsbehaleventhosethatdidnotnecessarilyinvolveremediation.Maj.opn.atpp.1920c.dis.opn.atpp.37-39.AchillingmessageorCaliornialawyerswhoaresworntovigorouslyandzealouslyrepresenttheinterestsotheirclients.ThemajorityissimplymistakeninconcludingthatbecausetheLegislatureamendedsection1714.10in1991aterDoctorsCo.disapprovedWolfrichthisgate-keepingstatuteservesnoscreeningunctionwhatsoever.Maj.opn.atp.14.ThatanalysisisunsupportedbytheplainmeaningotheamendmentortheLegislativehistory.Asthedissentcorrectlypointsouttheplaintismuststilldemonstrateareasonableprobabilityoprevailingonthemeritsotheirclaimsbyshowingtheattorney-deendantsactedinurtheranceotheirownfnancialgainotherthanearningoattorneyseesorthattheattorney-deendantsviolatedtheirowndutytotheplaintis.Dis.opn.atp.34.Theyhavenotdonesoonthisrecord.ENDNOTES1AsChangv.LedermanstatestheruleWhetheralawyersuedorproessionalnegligenceowedadutyocaretotheplaintiisaquestionolawanddependsonajudicialweighingothepolicyconsiderationsorandagainsttheimpositionoliabilityunderthecircumstances.72Cal.App.4that76citingGoodmanv.Kennedy197618Cal.3d335342whenthelitigationprivilegedoesnotcomeintoplayanattorneysliabilitytothirdpartiesisgenerallylimitedtoactionablemisrepresentation. Volume12013verdict27continuedonpage28younglawyerssectionEfectivelyPreparingorandTakinganExpertDepositionByJohnHolcombJr.andDanielKramerTheprimarygoaloanexpertdepositionistouncoveralltheopinionsthattheexpertwilloferattrial.Howtoachievethatprimarygoalisthesubjectothisarticle.Belowareproceduresnecessarytoefectivelyprepareorandtakeexpertdepositions.1.ACQuAINtINGyOuRSELFWItHtHEEXPERtSAREAOFEXPERtISEUnlikepartyorwitnessdepositionsexpertdepositionsbydenitionrequireabasiccomprehensionoaparticulareldorscienceoutsideothelaypersonscommonknowledge.Tereoreitisimperativethattheattorneydevotethetimenecessarytolearnabouttheexpertseldasitrelatestotheopinionstheexpertwillbeoferingattrial.Tisdoesnotmeantheattorneymusthavethesamelevelounderstandingotheeldastheexpertbutitdoesmeantheattorneyshouldknowenoughaboutthejargonandprevailingtheoriesintheexpertseldtocompetentlyconductthedeposition.ExpertdepositionsaregovernedbyCodeoCivilProceduresection2034.210etseq.andthebestplacetostartpreparingoranexpertdepositionistoreviewtheopposingpartysresponsetotheSection2034.210demand.TeresponsetoaSection2034.210demandmustincludethegeneralsubstanceothetestimonytheexpertintendstooferattrialandmustbeaccompaniedbyanexpertdeclarationsignedbyopposingcounselpursuanttosection2034.260.Tedeclarationmustcontain1Abrienarrativestatementothequalicationsoeachexpert.2Abrienarrativestatementothegeneralsubstanceothetestimonythattheexpertisexpectedtogive.3Arepresentationthattheexperthasagreedtotestiyatthetrial.4Arepresentationthattheexpertwillbesucientlyamiliarwiththependingactiontosubmittoameaninguloraldepositionconcerningthespecictestimonyincludinganyopinionanditsbasisthattheexpertisexpectedtogiveattrial.5Astatementotheexpertshourlyanddailyeeorprovidingdepositiontestimonyandorconsultingwiththeretainingattorney.CodeofCivilProcedure2034.260c.Asissetorthinsection2034.260c2abovecounselmustdisclosethegeneralsubstanceothetestimonyexpectedtobegiven.hismeansthepartymustdiscloseeitherinhiswitnessexchangelistorathisexpertsdepositionitheexpertisaskedthesubstanceotheactsandtheopinionswhichtheexpertwilltestiytoattrial.Onlybysuchadisclosurewilltheopposingpartyhavereasonablenoticeothespecicareasoinvestigationbytheexperttheopinionshehasreachedandthereasonssupportingtheopinionstotheendtheopposingpartycanprepareorcross-examinationandrebuttalotheexpertstestimony.Onlybysuchadisclosurewillthepossibilityoareasonablesettlementothecasebeoretrialbeencouraged.Kennemurv.StateofCalifornia1982133Cal.App.3d907919decidedunderormerCodeoCivilProcedure2037.3.AerbecomingamiliarwiththeresponsetotheSection2034.210demandanddeclarationtheattorneyneedstoperormresearchtodevelopabasiccomprehensionotheexpertseldandtheterminologylikelytobeused.Narrowlytargetedonlineresearchusingwordsearchesmaynotalwaysbethebestwaytogetanoverviewoanunamiliareldsometimesskimmingthetableocontentsandindexotreatisesisagoodideabeoredrillingdowntospecicsubjectstheexpertisexpectedtocover.Teattorneyshouldalsoconsultwiththedeenseexpertrelativetotheopinionsthatwillbeoferedbythedeense.Likelythedeenseexpertwillhavepreparedareportpriortotheplaintifsexpertsdepositionandthedeenseexpertwillbeabletogothroughtheplaintifsexpertsreportwiththeattorneytopointoutanyinconsistenciesoraddressareasthatneedclarication.2.DEtERMININGtHEEXPERtSINDIVIDuALBACKGROuND.Oncetheattorneyhasabasicunderstandingotheexpertsareaoexpertiseadditionalresearchshouldbedoneintotheexpertsindividualbackground.Forinstancetheattorneyshoulddosomeresearchintotheexpertsrmianytheexpertseducationalandvocationalbackgroundandtheexpertsworkhistory.Deposinganexpertwhohasbeenintheeldmanyyearsversusamoreacademicexpertmayyielddiferentresultsastheexpertsmayhavediferentapproachestothesameactualpatternandadiferentunderstandingothelitigationprocess.Teattorneyshouldbeullyawareiheisdealingwithanacademicoranexperiencedlitigationexpert.3.utILIZINGtHEASCDCEXPERtDEPOSItIONDAtABASEtOPREPAREFORDEPOSItIONPerhapsoneothemostsignicantbenetsthattheASCDCprovidestoitsmembersistheExpertDepositionDatabasewww.ascdc.orgExperts.asp.heDatabasewhichcanalsobeaccessedunderthememberservicestabothemainwebpageatwww.ascdc.orgprovidesmemberswiththeabilitytoreviewhundredsodepositiontranscriptsthathavebeenuploadedtothedatabase.ASCDChasormanyyearscollectedandorganizingexpertwitnessdepositionsromourBoardmembersandmemberrmswhichenablesmemberstohaveexpert 28verdictVolume12013YoungLawyerscontinuedfrompage27continuedonpage29specicinsightthatotherwisecouldonlybegainedthroughexperience.Additionallythedatabaseenablesattorneystodetermineitheexpertisgenerallyplaintifriendlyoritheexperthasconsultedwithboththeplaintifanddeensebar.CertainlythismustbeelicitedduringthedepositionbuttheDatabaseprovidessomeinsightintothisbeorethedepositionwhichotherwisewouldnotbeknown.OcoursetheDatabaseisagreatresourceorattorneyslookingtoretainagoodexpertaswellthisistheplacetocheckouthowtheyholdupunderquestioning.4.EXAMININGtHEEXPERtoreiteratetheprimarygoaloanexpertdepositionistoullyuncoverallotheopinionswhichtheexpertwillbepresentingattrial.Teconcernshouldnotbetryingtooutwittheexpertortogettheexperttosubscribetoaparticularactpattern.Tisisnotapartyorpercipientwitnessdepositionduringwhichyouareseekingtoelicitcertainactstatements.Insteadyouareseekingtounderstandallotheexpertsopinionssothatyouwillnotbesurprisedattrialandsothatyourexpertwillbepreparedtoreutethemattrial.AerallinalllikelihoodyouwillhaveasimilarlyskilledexpertonthedeensethatwillendeavortoreuteallotheopinionsothePlaintifsexpert.Oncesucientpreparationandunderstandingotheexpertseldhasbeenachievedyouarereadytoexaminethewitness.Belowisachecklistotopicsandquestionsthatshouldbeollowedineveryexpertdeposition1.RelationshipotheexpertwiththeopposingcounselandeesBeoregettingintothesubstanceotheexpertstestimonyitisimportanttoasktheexpertabouthisrelationshipwithopposingcounselandcounselsrmandtheeestheexpertisreceiving.Teexaminingattorneyshouldhaveaullunderstandingotheexpertshistoryasanexpertinlitigationtheamountoincometheexpertreceivesromlitigationworkandwhethertheexperttendstorepresentplaintifsordeendants.Teollowingtopicsshouldbeaddressedastheymayhaveabearingonshowingthejurythattheopposingexpertlacksobjectivitya.Whatpercentageocaseshastheexperthandledontheplaintifssideb.Howmanyyearshastheexpertworkedwithplaintifscounselc.Howmanyclientshastheplaintifsattorneyreerredtotheexpertinthelastyeard.Whataretheexpertseese.Whatistheexpertsincomeromlitigationworkandwhatpercentageotheexpertstotalincomeisromlitigation.Howmuchhastheexpertbeenpaidbyplaintifscounselthisyearandinyearspriorg.Doestheexperteverhandlecasesonalienh.Itheexpertdoeshandlecasesonalienwhatpercentageotheliendoestheexpertcustomarilywriteofi.Hastheexpertevernotrequiredsatisactionothelienithecasehasbeendismissedorresultedinadeenseverdict2.RelationshipoexperttoPlaintiAerdeterminingtheexpertsrelationshiptocounselandtestimonytrendsitisimportanttodeterminetherelationshipbetweentheexpertandtheplaintif.Teollowingtopicsshouldbeaddresseda.Howwastheexpertrstconnectedwiththeplaintifb.Hastheexpertbeenretainedbytheplaintifinthepastinanycapacityc.Howmuchtimedidtheexpertspendwiththeplaintifpriortoretentiond.Howmuchtimedidtheexpertspendwiththeplaintifaerretention3.ExpertshistoryotestiyingindepositionsandtrialsItisimportanttoknowwhetherornottheexpertisexperiencedinprovidingtestimony.Tiscanbederivedromdeterminingthepercentageotheexpertstotalincomereceivedromtestimonyassetorthabove.Howeveroraullunderstandingotheexpertshistorytheollowingtopicsshouldbeaddresseda.Howmanytimeshastheexperttestiedindepositionsortrialsb.Doestheexpertrecallthecasenamesothemattershehastestiedinrecentlyc.HastheexpertevertestiedinederalcourtNotethatthisarticleisbasedontakingexpertdepositionsinstatecourt.FederalRulesoCivilProcedureRule26governsexperttestimonyanddiscoveryinederalcourt.UnderstandingRule26isessentialwhenyourcaseisinederalcourt.ItisimportanttonotethatRule26wasamendedin2010makingchangestotheold1993Rule.TenewRuleaorbidsthediscoveryodrafexpertreportsRule26b4BballowsdiscoveryocertaincommunicationswithcounselRule26b4CandcrequiresexpertsonlytodiscloseactsordatautilizedinormingopinionsRule26a2Bii.d.Whatpercentageotheexpertstestimonygiveninstateversusederalcourte.Howmanytimeshastheexperttestiedortheplaintifversusdeense4.WhatdocumentsdidtheexpertreviewrelyuponTeexpertsopinionsandconclusionswillbebasedondocumentsanddatatheexperthasreviewed.Tereoreitisimportantthattheexpertullydiscloseeverythingthatwasreviewedorreliedupontoormtheexpertsopinion.a.Makesuretogothroughtheentireleotheexpertatthedepositionpagebypageandasktheexperttodescribeitscontents.b.Asktheexpertoranydigitalinormation.c.Onceyouhavecompletedgoingthrougheachdocumentasktheexpertitheyreviewedabsolutelyanythingelseanditheyplantodoso. Volume12013verdict29d.Dothedocumentsconrmtheplaintifstheoryothecase5.GoingthroughtheexpertreportandelicitingalloftheexpertsopinionsTemostimportantpartotheexpertdepositioniselicitingallotheopinionsthattheexpertintendstooferattrial.Itiscrucialtogothroughtheentirereportpreparedbytheexpertwiththeexpertduringthedepositiontoensurethatallopinionsotheexperthavebeendiscussed.Tereportitselistheguidelineorelicitingtheexpertsopinionsandproperlyconductingthedeposition.Whengoingthroughthereportwiththeexperttheollowingshouldbeaddresseda.Whendidtheexpertpreparethereportb.Howmanydrasothereportweremadepriortothenalreportc.Doestheexpertintendtosupplementthereportpriortotriale.Doesreportcontainallotheexpertsopinions6.EnsuringthatallopinionshavebeendiscussedOnceyourquestioningotheexperthasbeenconcludeditisimportanttomakesuretoasktheexperttwoquestionsinclosing1Havewereviewedallmaterialsthatyouhavereliedupontoormyouropinions2HavewediscussedallotheopinionsthatyouintendorexpecttooferattrialAskingthesequestionsprovidesasaeguardsothatnonewmaterialsoropinionsarepresentedattrial.Itispossiblethatyouhaveeitheroverlookedanareaorthattheexperthasorgottentomentionmaterialsreviewedoranopinionormed.Itheexpertprovidesyouwithsomethingnewaeryouhaveaskedthesequestionsitisimportanttoaskthequestionsyetagainoncethatsubjecthasbeenullydiscussed.CONCLuSIONAproperlytakenexpertdepositionwillallowthedeposingattorneytobeullypreparedtoexaminetheexpertattrial.Tereshouldbeabsolutelynoopinionthattheexpertofersintrialthatwasnotdiscussedintheexpertsdeposition.Itheaboveguidelinesareollowedandallopinionsotheexpertandthebasisothoseopinionsareullyexploredthedepositionwillbesuccessulandattorneycanrestcondentthatthedeensewillbeullypreparedortheexpertattrial.JohnHolcombJr.andDanielKramerarepartnersatKramerHolcombSheikLLPandleadthermslitigationpractice.TermbasedinCenturyCityperformsbothlitigationandtransactionalwork.Mr.KramerisontheboardoftheASCDCandwithMr.HolcombservesontheYoungLawyersCommittee.Mr.Kramerspracticecentersonpersonalinjuryandemploymentlitigation.Mr.Holcombfocusesonbusinessandentertainmentlitigation.YoungLawyerscontinuedfrompage28 30verdictVolume12013INtRODuCtIONRegulatoryagenciesoenconrontuncertaintyorlackodataconcerningthecausalrelationshipbetweenexposuretoaparticularchemicalsubstanceandaparticulareectonhumanhealth.Inthesesituationsregulatorsuseriskassessmenttoestimatetheextenttowhichexposuretoachemicalwillincreasetheincidenceoaparticularhealtheect.SeeReerenceManualonScienticEvidenceTirdEdition2011p.649McGarityOntheProspectoDaubertizingJudicialReviewoRiskAssessment66LawandContemporaryProblems1551572003.Incontroversialareasotoxictortswheretheissueodosei.e.howmuchisenoughtocauseanallegedharmisdisputedplaintisrequentlyturntoregulatoryriskassessmentstandardstollintheevidentiarygapcreatedbyalackodenitivescienceontherelationshipbetweenexposuretoaparticularproductandtheplaintisallegedinjury.Asexplainedbelowtheseriskassessmentstandardsarenotdesignedandthereoreshouldnotbeusedtomeasurecausalrelationshipsorpurposesoassigningtortliability.RegulatoryRiskAssessmentandTortLiabilityByDavidAxelradtHEREQuIREMENtSFORPROOFOFCAuSAtIONINtOXICtORtCASESortlawassignsresponsibilityorharmtopersonsorpropertyuponproothatthedeendantsbreachoadutyocareowedtotheplaintiwasasubstantialactorincausingharm.Seee.g.Weirumv.RKOGeneralInc.197515Cal.3d4046Tedeterminationoduty...isthecourtsexpressionothesumtotalothoseconsiderationsopolicywhichleadthelawtosaythattheparticularplaintiisentitledtoprotectionVinerv.Sweet200330Cal.4th12321239juryinstructionsoncausationinnegligencecasesshouldusethesubstantialactortestwhichsubsumesthebutortest.....Intheareaotoxicandenvironmentaltortsthelawimposesrigorousrequirementsorprooocausationbecauseothescienticuncertaintiesassociatedwiththeconsequencesohumanexposuretovariouschemicalsubstances.Tustobeheldresponsibleinatoxictortcaseexposuretothedeendantsproductmusthaveincreasedtheriskoaparticularharmabovethebaselinerisktowhicheveryoneisexposedintheabsenceoanyexposuretothedeendantsproduct.SeeWalkerTeConceptofBaselineRiskinortLitigation199180Ky.L.J.645-646673Injuriesresultingromthenormalrisksoliearenotcompensablebecausetheyarepartothedangerinherentinlivinginsociety.Baselinerisk...istheriskooccurrenceotheplaintisinjuryoraccidentinthesameorsimilarcircumstancesbutintheabsenceoanyactothedeendantthatinactcreatedanadditionalunreasonableriskotheinjuryoraccident....Baselineriskisthefoororthresholdriskabovewhichadeendantmusthavecreatedanincrementalriskinordertobeoundnegligent.osatisythisburdenoprooatoxictortplaintimustprovebothgeneralandspeciccausation.E.g.InreHanfordNuclearReservationLitigation9thCir.2002292F.3d11241134Inordertoprevailontheirtoxictortclaims...plaintismustestablishbothgenericandindividualcausationoriginalemphasisseeBernsteinGettingtoCausationinoxicortCases200874BrooklynL.Rev.5152Americancourtshavereachedabroadconsensusonwhatacontinuedonpage31 Volume12013verdict31plaintifmustshowtoprovecausationinatoxictortcase.Firstaplaintifmustshowthatthesubstanceinquestioniscapableocausingtheinjuryinquestion.Tisisknownasgeneralcausation.Secondaplaintifmustshowthatthissubstancecausedhisinjury.Tisisknownasspeciccausation.Fn.omitted..Prooogeneralcausationestablishesasathresholdmatterthataparticularchemicaliscapableocausinginhumansthetypeoharmsuferedbytheplaintif.E.g.InreHanfordNuclearReservationLitigationsupra292F.3d1124at1133General...causationhasbeendenedbycourtstomeanwhetherthesubstanceatissuehadthecapacitytocausetheharmalleged.IorexampleexposuretoChemicalAcanonlycauseheadacheinhumansandplaintifiscomplainingaboutskinrashthereisnogeneralcausationandplaintifsclaimails.Iasubstancedoeshavethecapacitytocausetheharmplaintifclaimstohavesuferedthentheplaintifmustprovespeciccausationbyestablishingareasonablemedicalprobabilitythatplaintifsactualexposuretothechemicalinquestionwasasubstantialactorincausingthisparticularplaintifsharm.E.g.InreHanfordNuclearReservationLitigationsupra292F.3dat1133individualcausationreerstowhetheraparticularindividualsufersromaparticularailmentasaresultoexposuretoasubstanceBonnervISPTechnologies8thCir.2001259F.3d924928theplaintifmustputorthsucientevidence...thattheproductwascapableocausingherinjuriesandthatitdidemphasisaddedParkerv.MobilOilCorp.N.Y.Ct.App.20067N.Y.3d434448857N.E.2d1114Itiswell-establishedthatanopiniononcausationshouldsetorthaplaintifsexposuretoatoxinthatthetoxiniscapableocausingtheparticularillnessgeneralcausationandthatplaintifwasexposedtosucientlevelsothetoxintocausetheillnessspeciccausation.Tekeytoprooospeciccausationisdoseevidencethattheplaintifwasexposedtothechemicalatissueinsucientquantitytoproducetheharmthatparticularchemicaliscapableoproducing.Seee.g.InreBextraandCelebrexMarketingSalesPracticesandProductLiabilityLitigationN.D.Cal.2007524F.Supp.2d11661174allchemicalagentsareintrinsicallyhazardous-whethertheycauseharmisonlyaquestionodose....McClainv.MetabolifeIntern.Inc.11thCir.2005401F.3d12331242Doseisthesinglemostimportantactortoconsiderinevaluatingwhetheranallegedexposurecausedaspecicadverseefect.tHEDISCONNECtBEtWEENCAuSAtIONREQuIREMENtSANDREGuLAtORyRISKASSESSMENtStANDARDSExactingcausationstandardsintoxictortlawensurethatonlythosespecicpersonswhoseconductorproductswereasubstantialactorincausingharmtoaparticularpersonwillbeheldlegallyresponsibletocompensatethepersonharmed.Incontrastregulatoryriskassessmentstandardsarenotmeanttogovernthelegalrelationshipsandresponsibilitiesbetweenparticularplaintifsanddeendants.Insteadregulatoryriskassessmentstandardsareasnotedaboveadoptedtoprotectpublichealthwherethereisuncertaintyorlackodataconcerningtherelationshipbetweenexposuretoachemicalandaparticularhealthefect.SeeLatinGoodScienceBadRegulationandToxicRiskAssessmentsYaleJ.onReg.8991-921988oxicriskassessmentsufersromundamentaluncertaintiesaboutcausalmechanismsorcancerandotherhazards....Teseuncertaintiesgenerallyprecludereliableassessmentsorelevantefectsandthereisnoscienticconsensusonhowtheyshouldberesolved....UndercurrentregulatorypracticesAgencyscientistsproduceriskassessmentsthatseldomapproachtheleveloreliabilitynormallyexpectedoscienticndingsindeedmanyestimatesarelittlemorethaneducatedguesses.Footnoteomitted.....Teprocessbywhichregulatoryriskassessmentstandardsareadoptedillustratesthedisconnectbetweensuchstandardsandthecase-specicstandardsorprooocausationinatortcase.RegulatoryRiskcontinuedfrompage30continuedonpage32 32verdictVolume12013tHEREGuLAtORyRISKASSESSMENtPROCESSILL-SuItEDtOPROOFOFCAuSAtIONHAZARDIDENIFICAIONTereareourstepsinregulatoryriskassessment1hazardidentication2dose-responseassessment3exposureassessmentand4riskcharacterization.DonaldW.SteverTeUseofRiskAssessmentinEnvironmentalLaw14Colum.J.Envtl.L.3291989.Terststepidenticationofthehazardisroughlyanalogoustothegeneralcausationinquiryintortlitigationi.e.canaparticularchemicalcauseanadversehealthefectSeeMcGaritysupran.7atpp.157-158.Becausethereislittleornodataconcerningefectsonhumansandhencetheperceivedneedoraregulatoryriskassessmentthisinquiryisoenbasedonanextrapolationromtheresultsoanimalstudiestothesupposedriskstohumans.SeeReerenceManualonScienticEvidenceTirdEdition2011pp.563636644EndicottInteractionBetweenRegulatoryandortLawinControllingoxicChemicalExposure47SMUL.Rev.5015041994.Extrapolatingromanimalstudieswhileperhapsacceptableintheconservativepreventionenvironmentoregulatoryriskassessmentisnotoriouslyproblematicwhenusedasaoundationorprooocausationinatortaction.Animalstudieshavetwosignicantdisadvantages....Firstanimalstudyresultsmustbeextrapolatedtoanotherspecieshumanbeingsanddiferencesinabsorptionmetabolismandotheractorsmayresultininterspeciesvariationinresponses.ReerenceManualonScienticEvidencesupraatp.563.Secondanimalstudiestypicallyusemuchhigherdosesthanthedosestowhichhumansareexposedwhichmakesitnecessarytoconsiderthedose-responserelationshipandwhetherathresholdno-efectdoseexists.Ibid.Tosemattersarealmostalwaysraughtwithconsiderableandcurrentlyunresolvableuncertainty.IbidseeEPAGuidelinesorCarcinogenRiskAssessment1986atpp.13-14Low-doseriskestimatesderivedromlaboratoryanimaldataextrapolatedtohumansarecomplicatedbyavarietyoactorsthatdiferamongspeciesandpotentiallyafecttheresponsetocarcinogens.IncludedamongtheseactorsarediferencesbetweenhumansandexperimentaltestanimalswithrespecttoliespanbodysizegeneticvariabilitypopulationhomogeneityexistenceoconcurrentdiseasepharmacokineticefectssuchasmetabolismandexcretionpatternsandtheexposureregimenLynchv.Merrell-NationalLaboratories1stCir.1987830F.2d11901194animalstudiesdonothavethecapabilityoprovingcausationinhumanbeingsintheabsenceoanyconrmatoryepidemiologicaldata.DOSERESPONSEASSESSMENTesecondstepisadoseresponseassessmentinvolvingadeterminationorriskassessmentpurposesothedosagelevelrequiredtoproduceaparticularhealthefectinhumans.Itisherethatriskassessmentisatitsmostcautious.Becausethegoaloriskassessmentisprotectionopublichealthwherethereisalackocausationevidenceriskassessorsmakeunsupportedconservativeassumptionsthattendtooverestimatetheactualriskoharm.Riskassessorsmaypayheedtoanyevidencethatpointstoaneedorcautionratherthanassessthelikelihoodthatacausalrelationshipinaspeciccaseismorelikelythannot....McLainv.MetabolifeInternationalInc.supra401F.3d1233at1249seeLatinsupraatpp.91-9294Riskassessorsoenrespondtoscienticuncertaintiesbyadoptingconservativesaety-orientedpositionsonsomeimportantissueswhiletheyusebest-current-scientic-guessmiddle-o-the-rangemethodological-convenienceorleast-costtreatmentsonothermaterialissuesEndicottInteractionBetweenRegulatoryLawandortLawinControllingoxicChemicalExposure47SMUL.Rev.501504-5051994Generallyriskassessors...consciouslyseektoerronthesideostandardsthatwillbemorenotlessprotectiveohumanhealth.TisisalaudablegoalbutthenetRegulatoryRiskcontinuedfrompage31continuedonpage33 Volume12013verdict33resultcanbeariskestimatethatvariesromtheactualriskbymanyordersomagnitudeShapiroPoliticizationofRiskAssessment37EnvironmentalLaw10831089Temandateoagenciestoactonthebasisoanticipatedharmmakesscienticuncertaintyanunavoidableaspectoregulatoryscience.....Inshortriskassessorswillutilizethemostsensitivedatasetsandthemostconservativeassumptionsinordertoachievethegoaloprotectingthepublicagainstallpotentialhealtheectsratherthandeterminingtheriskoharmtoanyactualpersonunderaparticularsetoacts.SeeBakerv.ChevronUSAInc.S.D.Ohio2010680F.Supp.2d865880Regulatorylevelsareosubstantialvaluetopublichealthagencieschargedwithensuringtheprotectionopublichealthbutareolimitedvalueinjudgingwhetheraparticularexposurewasasubstantialcontributingactortoaparticularindividualsdiseaseorillness...TisisbecauseregulatoryagenciesarechargedwithprotectingpublichealthandthusreasonablyemployalowerthresholdoprooinpromulgatingtheirregulationsthanisusedintortcasesSuterav.PerrierGroupofAmericaInc.D.Mass.1997986F.Supp.655664aregulatorystandardratherthanbeingameasureocausationisapublic-healthexposurelevelthatanagencydeterminespursuanttostatutorystandards...aregulatorspurposeistosuggestormakeprophylacticrulesgoverninghumanexposure...romthepreventiveperspectivethatagenciesadoptinordertoreducepublicexposuretoharmulsubstancesseealsoShapirosupra.Asaresulttheprocedurescommonlyusedinriskassessment...areoen...omarginalrelevancetoestimatingcausationinanindividuale.g.whetheraparticularchemicalcausedorcontributedtoaparticulardiseaseorillnessinagivenperson.Shapirosupra.Teprocessisalsoaectedbythepoliticalandsocialpolicybiasothegovernmententityconductingtheassessment.ForexampletheacceptablelevelsoexposureundertheCarterandReaganadministrationswerestarklydierenteventhoughthegovernmentsknowledgeotherisksoregulatedchemicalsdidnotmateriallychangeoverthattime.SeeLatinGoodScienceBadRegulationandoxicRiskAssessmentsYaleJ.onReg.19888995-96UndertheCarterAdministrationrisksaboveoneatalitypermillionexposedpeoplewereusuallytreatedasunacceptableieasiblecontrolmeasureswereavailable.ReaganAdministrationagencieshaveconcludedthatrisksashighasoneintenthousandorevenoneinahundredinsomesettingsaretolerable.Teserisk-managementdecisionsrefectdierentideologicalpreerencesanddierentassumptionsabouttheeconomicandpoliticaleectsotoxicsubstancesregulation.Similarconsiderationsimplicitlyinfuencerisk-assessmentpracticesandresultingestimatesotoxichazardsseealsoShapiroOMBandTePoliticizationofRiskAssessmentEnvironmentalLaw37Env.L.108310862007AdministrationocialsatotheragencieshoweverhavealsoaskedordemandedthatscientistschangeriskassessmentsbecausetheresultsdidnotsupportpolicyoutcomespreerredbytheAdministration..Tethresholdlevelsoexposureusedinsettingregulatoryriskassessmentstandardsareoensolowthatvirtuallyanyexposureisconsideredsignicant.Substitutingtheseconservativeexposurelevelsorprooocausationinaccordancewithtraditionaltortprinciplesunderminesthepredictabilityandairnessotortlawbycreatingtheriskthatpersonswhoseconductwasnotasubstantialactorincausingaplaintisallegedharmnonethelesswillbeheldresponsibleortheplaintisinjuryandrequiredtopaydamages.Itisthereorenotsurprisingthatcourtshaverepeatedlyrejectedthenotionthatthereisnosaeleveloexposuretoachemicalandthatevidenceoexposuretoanyamounthoweversmallcanestablishcausation.Seee.g.Parkerv.MobilOilCorp.N.Y.App.Div.2005793N.Y.S.2d43416A.D.3d648653ad.20067N.Y.3d434857N.E.2d1114StatingthatanyexposuretobenzeneisunsaeisnottantamounttostatingthatanyexposuretobenzenecausescancerNationalBankRegulatoryRiskcontinuedfrompage32continuedonpage34 34verdictVolume12013RegulatoryRiskcontinuedfrompage34ofCommercev.AssociatedMilkProducersE.D.Ark.199822F.Supp.2d942966-967criticizingthenothresholddosetheoryoplaintisexpertsandconcludingthatthisfawedlogicisnosubstituteorreliablescienticprooocausationSuterav.PerrierGroupofAmericaInc.D.Mass.1997986F.Supp.655666hereisnoscienticevidencethatthelinearno-saethresholdanalysisisanacceptablescientictechniqueusedbyexpertsindeterminingcausationinanindividualinstanceMcClainsupra401F.3datpp.1242-1243ODonnelloersnoopinionaboutthedoseoMetaboliethatcausedischemicstrokesinthreeplaintisandaheartattackintheother.HeonlysaidthatanyamountoMetabolieistoomuchwhichclearlycontradictstheprinciplesoreliablemethodology.....EXPOSUREASSESSMENTTethirdstepisanexposureassessmentinvolvinganalysisothemagnituderequencydurationandrouteoexposuretoachemicaloraparticularpopulation.Tebiasinregulatoryriskassessmentavoringmaximumprotectionopublichealthgenerallymeansthatinassessingexposurethegreatestpossibleexposureorthelongestperiodotimewillbeassumedtohaveoccurredregardlessotherelationshipbetweenthatassumptionandanyactualexposures.SeeAsbestosInformationAssnNorthAmericav.OccupationalSafetyandHealthAdmin.5thCir.1984727F.2d415425-4265thCir.1984Althoughriskassessmentanalysisisanextremelyuseultool...theresultsoitsapplicationtoasmallsliceotimearespeculativebecausetheunderlyingdata-baseprojectsonlylong-termrisks.Epidemiologistsgenerallystudyonlytheconsequencesolong-termexposuretoasbestosRodricksRiskAssessmenttheEnvironmentandPublicHealthEnvironmentalHealthPerspectivesVolume102Number3March1994p.259www.ncbi.nlm.nih.govpmcarticlesPMC1567122pdfenvhper00391-0015.pdflastvisitedJuly92012seealsoFitzsimmonsetal.WhenLikelyDoesNotMeanMoreLikelyTanNotTeDangersoAllowingGovernmentChemicalClassicationsandNumericRiskAssessmentsatriallastvisitedJuly92012.Teassumptionwillalsobethatexposuresaregenerici.e.thattheleveloexposureisthesameacrossallpopulationsregardlessoactualdierencesinexposurethatmayexistromonegrouptoanother.SeeFitzsimmonsetal.WhenLikelyDoesNotMeanMoreLikelyTanNotTeDangersoAllowingGovernmentChemicalClassicationsandNumericRiskAssessmentsatrialsupraRodricksRiskAssessmenttheEnvironmentandPublicHealthEnvironmentalHealthPerspectivessupra.Inthecourtroomhoweveractualexposureratherthanassumedexposuregovernscausationanalysis.SeeBorg-WarnerCorp.v.Floresex.2007232S.W.3d765773Borg-WarnerDeendant-specicevidencerelatingtotheapproximatedosetowhichtheplaintiwasexposedcoupledwithevidencethatthedosewasasubstantialactorincausingtheasbestos-relateddiseasewillsuce...Itisnotadequatetosimplyestablishthatsomeexposureoccurred....heremustbereasonableevidencethattheexposurewasosucientmagnitudetoexceedthethresholdbeorealikelihoodocausationcanbeinerred.OVERALLRISKCHARACTERIZATIONTenalstepintheregulatoryriskassessmentanalysisisanoverallriskcharacterization.Herebecausetheriskassessmentisdealingwithinherentuncertaintiesriskassessorsmakeassumptionsconcerningtheoreticallietimerisksi.e.whatmightoccurgiventheconservativeassumptionsadoptedorpurposesoprotectingpublichealth.SeeAsbestosInformationAssnNorthAmericav.OccupationalSafetyandHealthAdmin.supraRodrickssupraFitzsimmonssupra.Teresultingacceptableriskassumesmaximumlevelsoexposureatwhichnoregulatoryactionisrequiredthatareoennegligibleornearzero.Tisassumptionhasnoplaceinacourtroomwhereasnotedaboveexposuremustbecausallyrelatedtotheplaintisinjury.CONCLuSIONTeendresultoregulatoryriskassessmentisapictureowhatmightbepossiblebutnotwhatisprobableorevenlikelyoranyparticularpersonorpopulationunderanyparticularsetoactualcircumstancesorinotherwordsaresultwhichdoesnotsatisytherequirementsorprooocausationinatortcase.DavidAxelradisapartneratHorvitzLevyandaCaliforniaStateBarCertiedAppellateSpecialist.Hehashandledhundredsofcivilappealsinstateandfederalcourtsincludingawidevarietyoftoxictortcases. Volume12013verdict35defenseverdictsjanuarymarchSeanD.BeaBeattyMyersLLPCharlesKuniyoshiv.oyotaMotorSalesU.S.A.Inc.No.37-2011-00091257-CU-BC-CLRamondL.BlesseTaylorBlesseyLLPSeemanv.McGuireBenjaminF.CoasEngleCarobiniCoatsLLPBensonv.LuckenbacherPariciaEganDaehnkeBonneBridgesMuellerOKeefeNicholsJeanineDelCarlov.LindaLiM.D.ChrospherE.FaenzaYokaSmithGutzwillerv.RosalesPeerW.FelchlinYokaSmithGutzwillerv.RosalesRoberJ.GokooLawOcesofRobertJ.GokoooddNeikirkv.CityofMonroviaTePeopleoftheStateofCaliforniaTeStateofCaliforniaCaltransDoes1-10InclusiveandDoeCorporations1-10InclusiveNo.GC047294yukK.LawLawBrandmeyerPackerLLPLeticiaGaribaldiandRaulGaribaldiv.BeverlyHospitaletal.TomasF.McAndrewsRebackMcAndrewsKjarWarfordStockalperMooreLLPakariaHoseabyandthroughherConservatorandNaturalMotherSharonHoseavs.LongBeachMemorialMedicalCenterGailCarruthersM.D.Does2through20ArrowheadRegionalMedicalCenterChanderMalhotraM.D.andRoes1through20DanielR.SullivanSullivanBallogWilliamsLLPDoolinv.TeRomanCatholicBishopofOrangeJohnJ.taskerEarlyMaslachOSheaChristopherReddv.JambryScottNo.PC048088DoyouhaveadefenseverdictyoudliketosharewithyourcolleaguesSenditintodaysothatyournamewillappearinthenextissueofverdictE-mailthedetailsofyourverdicttoascdccamgmt.com 36verdictVolume12013amicuscommitteereportcontinuedonpage37ASCDCsAmicusCommitteecontinuestoworkenergeticallyonbehalfofitsmembership.ASCDCsAmicusCommitteehassubmittedamicuscuriaebriefsinseveralrecentcasesintheCaliforniaSupremeCourtandCaliforniaCourtofAppealandhashelpedsecuresomemajorvictoriesforthedefensebar.2012YearinReviewPublishedcaseswhereASCDCsubmittedbriefsonthemeritsDuringthelastyearASCDChassubmittedamicusbriesonthemeritsinourcasesraisingissuesointeresttothedeensebarA.Nalwav.CedarFairL.P.201255Cal.4th1148CourtadoptedpositionadvocatedbyASCDCandheldthatthedoctrineoprimaryassumptionoriskbarredclaimbyplaintifinjuredonbumpercarrideatamusementpark.ASCDCsubmittedajointamicusbriewiththeAssociationoDeenseCounseloNorthernCaliorniaandNevadadraedbyDonWillenburgGordonReesandJoshraverColePedroza.B.Coitov.SuperiorCourt201254Cal.4th480CourtadoptedpositionadvocatedbyASCDCandheldthatworkproductdoctrineappliestowrittenwitnessstatement.ASCDCbriesubmittedbyPaulSalvatyGlaserWeil.C.Aryehv.CannonBusinessSolutions201355Cal.4th1185ReneKonigsbergDiazatBowmanandBrookesubmittedamicusbrieonthemeritsonbehaloASCDC.TeSupremeCourtheldthatthestatuteolimitationsoraUCLBus.Pro.Code17200etseq.claimmaybetolledunderthediscoveryrule.D.ColonyBancorp.ofMalibuInc.v.Patel2012204Cal.App.4th410CourtruledagainstpositionadvocatedbyASCDCandheldthatatrialcourthasdiscretiontoproceedwithbenchtrialwithoutdeensecounselbeingpresentwheretherewasnopriorwarningadmonitionetc.EdithR.MatthaiandNatalieKouyoumdjianRobieMatthaisubmittedamicusbrieonbehaloASCDC.HaveyoureadanygoodnonpubslatelyDuringthelastyearASCDChasbeensuccessulinhavingsevennonpublishedopinionsorderedpublishedallowhichareavorabletothedeenseA.Hodjatv.StateFarm2012211Cal.App.4th1TeCourtoAppealarmedthetrialcourtsrulingdenyingplaintifacontinuanceonahearingoramotionorsummaryjudgmentinordertocorrectproceduraldeectsintheirevidentiaryobjections.StevenFleischmanandJeremyRosenoHorvitzLevysubmittedthesuccessulpublicationrequest.B.Batarsev.SEIULocal10002012209Cal.App.4th820Tedeendantmovedorsummaryjudgment.Teplaintifsopposingseparatestatementwasprocedurallydeective.Tetrialcourtgrantedsummaryjudgmentonthatbasisanddeniedplaintifsrequestoracontinuanceinordertoxtheirdeectiveseparatestatement.TeCourtoAppealarmed.HarryChamberlainandDonWillenburgsubmittedajointrequestorpublicationonbehaloASCDCandtheAssociationoDeenseCounseloNorthernCaliorniaandNevada.C.Caronv.MercedesBenzFinancial2012208Cal.App.4th7reviewgrantedTecourtreversedthetrialcourtsdenialoamotiontocompelarbitrationinanunpublishedopinion.TeopinionhassomeavorablelanguageaboutthescopeotheUnitedStatesSupremeCourtsdecisioninConcepcionaswellasabouthowtheresnothingwrongwithrequiringaplaintiftoindividuallyarbitratehisclaimswithoutbeingabletoresorttoaclassaction.StevenFleischmanandJohnQuierooHorvitzLevysubmittedapublicationrequestwhichwasgrantedonJuly302012.TeSupremeCourtsubsequentlyissuedagrantandholdorder. Volume12013verdict37AmicusCommitteeReportcontinuedfrompage36D.Nessonv.NorthernInyoCountyLocalHospitalDist.2012204Cal.App.4th65Tisisapro-deenserulingonananti-SLAPPmotioninamedicalpeerreviewsettingthatgivesaverybroadreadingoKiblerv.NorthernInyoCountyLocalHosp.Dist.200639Cal.4th192.Kiblerestablishedthatpeerreviewconstitutesanocialproceedingundertheanti-SLAPPstatute.JeremyRosenandStevenFleischmanHorvitzLevywrotethesuccessulrequestorpublication.E.Tayerv.KabateckBrownKellner2012207Cal.App.4th141TeCourtoAppealreversedthetrialcourtsdenialothedeendantsanti-SLAPPmotion.TeCourtoAppealheldthatanon-clientsclaimagainstclasscounselormattersarisingromlitigationdisbursementosettlementproceedswasprotectedbytheanti-SLAPPstatute.Tecaseweighsinonthecontinuingcontroversyowhetherclaimsagainstlawyersbasedonlitigationconductaresubjecttotheanti-SLAPPstatute.StevenFleischmanandJeremyRosenoHorvitzLevywrotethesuccessulpublicationrequest.F.Comstockv.Aber2012212Cal.App.4th931Tisopinioncontainsacomprehensivediscussionoanti-SLAPPproceduralissuesavorabletothedeense.TeCourtoAppealarmedthegrantingoananti-SLAPPmotioninanemploymentcase.JoshraverColePedrozasubmittedthesuccessulpublicationrequest.G.Reichertv.StateFarmGenlIns.Co.2012212Cal.App.4th1543MitchilnerandStevenFleischmanoHorvitzLevysubmittedthepublicationrequestwhichwasgranted.Tecaseinvolvesahouseordereddestroyedbyagovernmentalentityorailuretocomplywithfoodplainregulations.TeCourtoAppealheldthatthiswasaclearexampleothelaworordinanceexclusioninthepolicyandarmedthegrantingosummaryjudgmentinavoroStateFarm.HowaboutthoseunfortunateopinionsthatyouwishwouldnevermakeittotheboundvolumesinthelibraryTeAmicusCommitteewasalsosuccessulinhavingtheSupremeCourtdepublishtwocaseswhichwereadversetothedeensebarA.Shifenv.Spiro2012206Cal.App.4th481ordereddepublishedTeCourtoAppealreversedthegrantingosummaryjudgmentinavorodeendantlawrmbasedonthestatuteolimitationsCodeCiv.Proc.340.6.EdithMatthaiandNatalieKouyoumdjianoRobieMatthaiwrotearequestordepublicationwhichwasgrantedonSeptember122012.B.Moodyv.Bedord2012202Cal.App.4th745ordereddepublishedHeirodeceasedcontactedinsurancecompanyandrepresentedshewasthesolesurvivingheir.Insurancecompanypaidpolicylimits.Plaintithensuesclaimingshewastheothersurvivingheir.Tetrialcourtgrantedsummaryjudgmentinavorothedeendantundertheso-calledoneactionruleorwronguldeathcasesCodeCiv.Proc.377.60.TeCourtoAppealreversedholdingthattheone-actionruleisnottriggeredunlessanduntilawronguldeathactionisled.Accordinglytheruleisnottriggeredwhenawronguldeathclaimissettledwithoutlitigation.Tustoobtaintheprotectionotheone-actionruleoritsinsuredtheinsurermustinsistthatthewronguldeathclaimantleanactionagainstitsinsuredbeoretheinsurersettlestheclaim.MitchilneroHorvitzLevywroteasuccessuldepublicationrequest.continuedonpage38 38verdictVolume12013PendingCasesAtTeCaliforniaSupremeCourtandCourtofAppealASCDCsAmicusCommitteehassubmittedamicuscuriaebriesintheollowingcasespendingattheCaliorniaSupremeCourtorCaliorniaCourtoAppealointeresttoASCDCsmembership1.Sanchezv.ValenciaNo.S199119TiscaseincludestheollowingissueDoestheFederalArbitrationAct9U.S.C.2asinterpretedinATTMobilityLLCv.Concepcion2011563U.S.__131S.Ct.1740preemptstatelawrulesinvalidatingmandatoryarbitrationprovisionsinaconsumercontractasprocedurallyandsubstantivelyunconscionableJ.AlanWareldMcKennaLongAldridgesubmittedanamicusbrieonbehaloASCDC.2.Corenbaumv.LampkinTisissueispendingattheCourtoAppeal.Tecourthasrequestedamicusbriesontheissueotheadmissibilityobilledbutunpaidmedicalbillspost-Howellorpurposesotherthantoprovepastmedicaldamages.RobertOlsonGreinesMartinSteinRichlandandJ.AlanWareldMcKennaLongAldridgehavesubmittedamicusbrieonbehaloASCDCarguingthatsuchevidenceisinadmissibleorallpurposesbutiadmittedmustbeadmittedwithproperlimitinginstructions.3.Kesnerv.SuperiorCourtPnumoAbexLLC.Tiscaseinvolvestheissueowhetheraplaintifcanmaintainatakehomeasbestosclaimi.e.claimingthattheplaintifwasexposedtoasbestosthroughaamilymemberbringinghomeasbestosbersonclothing.TeCourtoAppealheldnoinCampbellv.FordMotorCo.2012206Cal.App.4th15.TetrialcourtinthiscaseollowedCampbellanddismissedtheplaintifsclaims.TeissueisnowpendingbeoreadiferentdistrictotheCourtoAppealinawritproceedingthecourthasissuedanalternativewritindicatingthatitmaydisagreewithCampbell.ASCDCjoinedtheamicusbriesubmittedbyDonWillenburgGordonReesonbehalotheAssociationoDeenseCounseloNorthernCaliorniaandNevada.HowtheAmicusCommitteeCanHelpYourAppealorWritPetitionandHowtoContactUsHavingthesupportotheAmicusCommitteeisoneothebenetsomembershipinASCDC.TeAmicusCommitteecanassistyourrmandyourclientinseveralways1.Amicuscuriaebriesonthemeritsincasespendinginappellatecourts.2.LettersinsupportopetitionsorrevieworrequestsordepublicationtotheCaliorniaSupremeCourt.3.LettersrequestingpublicationounpublishedCaliorniaCourtoAppealdecisions.InevaluatingrequestsoramicussupporttheAmicusCommitteeconsidersvariousissuesincludingwhethertheissueathandisointeresttoASCDCsmembershipasawholeandwouldadvancethegoalsoASCDC.IyouhaveapendingappellatematterinwhichyoubelieveASCDCshouldparticipateasamicuscuriaepleaseeelreetocontactanyBoardmemberorthechairsotheAmicusCommitteewhoareSevenS.FleischmanHorvitzLevy818-995-0800RoberOlsonGreinesMartinSteinRichlandLLP310-859-7811J.AlanWareldMcKennaLongAldridge213-243-6105YoumayalsocontactmembersotheAmicusLiaisonSubcommitteewhoareJeremyRosenHorvitzLevyHarryChamberlainManattPhelpsPhillipsJoshtraverColePedrozaReneeKoninsbergBowmanBrookeMichaelColonMichaelA.ColtonLawyerCounseloratLawDavidPrueCarrollKellyTrotterFranzenMcKennaJohnManierNassiriJungLLPSheilaWirkusGreinesMartinSteinRichlandChrisianNagyCollinsCollinsMuirStewartPaulSalvayGlaserWeilFredM.PlevinPaulPlevinSullivanConnaughtonLLPAmicusCommitteeReportcontinuedfrompage37 Volume12013verdict39nJune202013wewillonceagainhaveourHalloFamedinnerattheBiltmoreHotel.Thisitalwaysauneventwhenwemeettohonoramemberwhohasmadesigniicantcontributionstoourorganizationaplaintisattorneywhoisundisputedasbothaworthyandciviladversaryandamemberothejudiciarywhoisknownorbothhighintegrityandairness.Thisyearwewillsaluteour1989PresidentBobBakerTomGirardiandtheHonorableBillMacLaughlin.RickKraemeroExecutivePresentationswillagainbeworkingwithustoprepareshortandentertainingintroductionsothehonoreesandweexpectaullhousesoitsnottooearlytobuyatable.nJuly182013JudgeDanBuckleyandothersinvolvedinthePICourtsdowntownLosAngeleswillpresentaseminartoletusknowhowitsallgoingsoar.MarkthedateonyourcalendarandlookorASCDCe-mailsorurtherdetailsregardingthisinormationalseminaraswellasothernewdevelopmentsintheLosAngelesSuperiorCourtinthecomingmonths.earerevitalizingoursubstantivelawcommitteesandattheAnnualSeminarwehadagreatstartwithmini-sessionsonmedicalmalpracticeproductsliabilityandinsurancelaw.WearestartinganIntellectualPropertysubstantivelawcommitteethatwehopewillattractourmemberswhopracticeinthisspecializedareaandwillalsohelpusconvinceIPattorneyswhoarenotcurrentlyASCDCmemberstojoin.OurEmploymentCommitteeisplanningaseminartodiscusstheimpactotheHarrisv.CityofSantaMonicacaseandtheutureothemixed-motivedeenseinCaliorniathissummer.urYoungLawyerCommitteeisenergeticenthusiasticandcommittednotonlytobegreatdeenselawyersbuttomeeteachotherandhavesomeun.Theyareplanningseveralget-togethersthroughouttheyearnotonlyindowntownLosAngelesbutontheWestsideotownandwhereverelsetheycangetsponsorstosupplyappetizersandcocktails.Whatsgreatisthatallyoungatheartmembersarewelcometoparticipate.LetusknowiyouwanttobeincludedontheYoungLawyersoASCDCe-maillistoriyouhaveyounglawyersinyourfrmwhowouldenjoythecamaraderieoellowdeenseattorneys.urMedicalMalpracticeCommitteealreadyhasasix-hourMCLEprogramplannedorSeptember20and212013inSantaBarbara.WebroughtbacktheSantaBarbaramedmalseminarlastyearanditwasahugesuccess.WeexpectthisyeartobeevenbetterandtheseminaroverFridayaternoonandSaturdaymorningwillincludesessionsthatareinormativetothegeneraldeensepracticeaswellastothoseouswhopracticemedmaldeensesothatalloourmemberscanbeneftromattendance.Theever-popularoptionalwinetouronSaturdayaternoonwillalsoundoubtedlybeahighlightotheweekend.urConstructionDeectCommitteehasscheduleditsannualConstructionDeectseminarorDecember52013inOrangeCountywhichwillbeollowedbyajudicialreceptionhonoringtheOrangeCountybench.OurSecretaryTreasurerGlennBargerwillonceagaintaketheleadonthisseminarwhichissubstantivelyexcellentandalwaysoneoourbestattendedeventsotheyear.urannualLosAngelesJudicialandNewMemberreceptionwillendthecalendaryearonDecember172013attheJonathanClub.ThisisaestivetimeoyearattheJonathanClubwithholidaydecorationsandspirittomatch.Itisagreatopportunityorourmemberstothankthejudgesorthehardworktheydoandorournewmemberstomeetthejudgesthattheyusuallyonlyseeintheirrobesonthebench.Andbestoallnewmembersattendorree.syouallknowourAnnualSeminarwasamajorsuccess.KarlRoveprovedtobenotonlyanintelligentandentertainingluncheonspeakerbuthewasmostgraciousandshowedagenuineinterestinourmembers.ASCDChasarichhistoryinpresentingiconicspeakersoallpoliticalstripesromRonaldReagantoBillClinton.WewereaspleasedwithMr.RoveaswewerewithJamesCarvillelastyear.Icannotwaittoseewhowewilldrawasaspeakerin2014asheorshewillundoubtedlybethebestreasontoonceagainattendtheAnnualSeminar.ewillkeepourmembersupdatedregardingallprogramsthroughouttheyearthroughe-mailandourwebsite.IyouhaveasuggestionorahottopicseminarorwouldlikeurtherinormationpleasecontactmeorourExecutiveDirectorJennierBlevinsatascdccamgmt.comorvisitourwebsiteatwww.ascdc.org.WelookorwardtoseeingyouYoureInvitedByN.DeniseTaylorASCDCPresidentWhatdowehaveplannedforthisyear 40verdictVolume12013DianeMarWiesmannImmediatePastPresidenttheassociationofsoutherncaliforniadefensecounsel2520ventureoakswaysuite150sacramentoca95833800.564.6791www.ascdc.orgexecutivecommitteeN.DeniseTaylorPresidentRobertA.OlsonVicePresidentMichaelSchonbuchVicePresidentGlennT.BargerSecretary-TreasurerboardofdirectorsJamesB.ColeMichaelA.ColtonPeterS.DoodyThomasP.FeherClarkR.HudsonLisaJ.McMainsGaryT.MontgomeryLisaPerrochetLawrenceR.RamseyJohnW.ShawPatrickStockalperJeffreyA.WalkerStephenC.PasarowNinosP.SaroukhanioffJulianneDeMarcoChristopherE.FaenzaDanKramerEdwardR.Leonard theassociationofsoutherncaliforniadefensecounsel2520VentureOaksWaySuite150sacramentoca95833PRE-SORTFIRSTCLASSU.S.POSTAGEPAIDPERMIT1660SacramentoCAJune202013HallofFameDinnerMillenniumBiltmoreHotelLosAngelesJuly182013LosAngelesCourtsUpdatewithJudgeDanBuckleyLosAngelesSuperiorCourtSeptember20-212013SantaBarbaraSeminarSantaBarbaraDecember52013ConstructionDefectSeminarwCDClaimsManagersAssociationOrangeCountyDecember52013OrangeCountyJudicialReceptionOrangeCountyDecember172013JudicialandNewMemberReceptionJonathanClubLosAngelesFebruary27-282014ASCDC53rdAnnualSeminarMillenniumBiltmoreHotelLosAngeles