A member of the State Bar sought to vacate a stipulation she had entered with the State Bar regarding two attorney disciplinary actions against her. The State Bar filed a special motion to strike under Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16 [antiSLAPP statute], which the superior court granted, along with $2,575.04 in sanctions against the lawyer. […]
Sterilization Of Developmentally Disabled Woman Is Incidental To Medcally Necessary Treatment Ordered By Court.
A developmentally disabled woman suffers from numerous health problems, including an abnormally long and heavy menses and debilitating migraine headaches that usually coincide with the onset of her menses. After numerous other treatments for her severe menstrual bleeding and migraines failed, her doctors recommended a hysterectomy and oophorectomy. The trial court found Probate Code section 2357 […]
Order Sanctioning And Disqualifying A Law Firm Reversed.
ppotentially conflicted and concluded the law firm could not jointly represent the company and the nonmember individual against the company’s minority members. The court based it ruling on rule 3-310(C) of the State Bar Rules of Professional Conduct and Gong v. RFG Oil, Inc. (2008) 166 Cal.App.4th 209, [82 Cal.Rptr.3d 416]. The appellate court reversed, […]
Plaintiff’s Counsel Should Not Have Been Disqualified Because Of The Expert Witness He Hired.
Plaintiff informed defendant he hired an expert who had previously testified on behalf of the defendant. Defendant claimed the expert possessed confidential attorney-client and work product information, and the trial court disqualified plaintiff’s counsel. The appellate court stated that even if attorney client work product conveyed to a consulting expert remains subject to work product protection, […]
Law Firm Should Not Have Been Disqualified.
The introductory paragraph to the opinion speaks for itself: “The trial court disqualified a law firm from simultaneously representing a limited liability company, its managing member (a partnership), and the person who managed that partnership (who was not himself a member of the company) in a lawsuit against two of the company’s minority members. The court […]
Allegations Of Breach Of Professional And Ethical Duties Against Lawyer.
A lawyer, who was co-founder of a firm, resigned from the law firm after an internal dispute. Five days prior to the effective date of his resignation, he remotely accessed the law firm’s document management system and spent several hours reviewing certain files relating to real estate transactions. Five months afterwards, one of the law firm’s […]
An Expert’s Dilemma In Reporting Child Abuse.
At issue here are two divergent legislative schemes: 1) An expert engaged to assist a lawyer in representation of a client is obligated to maintain the confidentiality of client communications. [Evidence Code sections 912 and 952.]; 2) Under the Child Abuse and Neglect Reporting Act [CANRA; Penal Code section 11164, et seq.], psychiatrists, psychologists, clinical social […]
The Buck Stops With The District Attorney, Not The State Of California.
A man who spent 24 years in prison after being convicted of murder because of the perjured testimony of a jailhouse informant, filed an action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, claiming the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office failed to create any system for deputy D.A.’s handling criminal cases to access information pertaining to the benefits […]
Reviewing Opponent’s Privileged Documents May Lead To Attorney Disqualification.
Where law firm obtained opponents’ privileged documents which were protected by the attorney-client privilege and used these documents, the trial court properly disqualified the law firm. Where lawyers receive documents that are obviously privileged, they can only examine them to the extent necessary to determine the privileged character of the documents and immediately notify the sender that […]
Law Firm Sanctioned For Frivolous Appeal.
The appellate court stated: “Attorney Defendants have misrepresented the record and ignored established case law without explanation or justification.” In its disposition, the appellate court further stated: “As sanctions for a frivolous appeal, Attorney Defendants shall pay Kendall the amount of $52,727.56. Attorney Defendants also are assessed $8,500 sanctions for bringing this frivolous appeal, payable to […]