Legal News and Appellate Tips

Each week, TVA appellate attorney Tim Kowal reviews several recent decisions out of the appellate courts in California, and elsewhere, and reports about the ones that might help you get an edge in your cases and appeals.

If you would like to receive weekly updates of the articles posted here, click here to sign up for the newsletter.

Tag: Experts

Exclusion of Expert Data Affirmed on Appeal; But Exlusion of Expert Opinion Based on That Data Reversed

When it comes to expert evidence, the trial court may properly exclude evidence that was not actually prepared by the expert. The normal rules of evidence authentication still apply, even where experts are concerned. But when an expert wants to offer opinions based on the same unauthenticated and unadmitted evidence, excluding that opinion may be an abuse of discretion.

That is the holding of the published opinion in Zuniga v. Alexandria Care Center, LLC (D2d7 Aug. 13, 2021) 2021 WL 3579021 no. B297023. In an employee's PAGA claim, the employee-plaintiff retained two experts. One expert was retained to convert the employer's time records into an Excel spreadsheet. The second expert was retained to opine on the spreadsheet. It was an abuse of discretion to exclude the second expert's opinion merely because it was based on the first expert's excluded report.

And trial counsel may have acted shrewdly in resting her case after the devastating ruling without offering other evidence, as it made it very easy to establish the ruling prejudiced her case.

Get a weekly digest of these articles delivered to your inbox by subscribing here: https://lnkd.in/g23bc4Y.

Read More
Hearsay Evidence Through Expert Witness Held Improper; Judgment Reversed

One important case that counsel preparing for a trial need to keep ready to hand is People v. Sanchez (2016) 63 Cal.4th 665 (Sanchez), which prohibits parties from offering otherwise hearsay evidence through their experts.

That is what the plaintiff tried to do in the catastrophic injury case of Townsend v. Olivo (D4d2 Jun. 15, 2021) no. E073183 (non-pub.). The plaintiff suffered injuries that would lead to amputation of his leg. His expert witness testified to the $1.1 million in future medical costs. But the expert admitted he had no knowledge relating to these future procedures and prosthetic devices. He had spoken with others about the costs, however, and so testified about that.

The Fourth District Court of Appeal held this was error. The expert’s testimony about future medical expenses was inadmissible hearsay. The foundational facts were outside of the expert’s personal knowledge, and no other witness supplied them, so no hearsay exception applies.

Read More
Wesson Oil Class Settlement Reversed: 9th Cir. Holds Trial Court Abused Discretion in Assuming Post-Cert. Settlement Was Not Collusive

Class actions only very loosely resemble the practice of law as most attorneys know it. Yes, they involve plaintiffs suing defendants in court before a judge. But most of the class members don't even know they're in the case, and wouldn't know their attorney if he showed up at their doorstep delivering a settlement check (in this case, a check for about $0.15). Things are much different for their attorneys, however, as was the case in Briseño v. Henderson, --- F.3d ---- (9th Cir. June 1, 2021), who proposed to pocket millions from what the Ninth Circuit held to be a collusive settlement agreement in a false advertising case over cooking oil.

The new clarification Briseño provides is that the rule requiring close scrutiny of class settlements applies both pre-class certification and post-class certification.

An ancillary lesson from Briseño is, experts will say anything.

And the much less important but more entertaining lesson from Briseño is: Judge Lee really loves puns (such as: the attorneys suing Wesson here were "hoping to strike oil"); and pop-culture references to Star Wars and the Hamilton musical.

Read More
Justice Wiley Urges Bar to Consider Independent Experts

In a first-of-its-kind case, California's Court of Appeal has authorized a "Wi-Fi Sickeness" case to proceed. Although such cases have been rejected in ADA cases in federal courts, the California court in Brown v. Los Angeles Unified School District (D2d8 Feb. 18, 2021) No. B294240 noted the broad "physical disability" protections of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) and California's liberal pleading standard made the difference here.

In a concurring opinion, Justice Wiley says he sees how we practitioners are using expert witnesses, and he doesn't like it. He urges the bar instead to consider using court-appointed experts.

If I may be permitted to disagree, I think this is not the right case for that. In a cause of action for accounting, by all means. But in a case involving still-emerging science, fact-finders need to be presented with what the parties think are the most compelling hypotheses.

Read More

Tags

Podcast (46)
Videos (31)
Abuse of Discretion (15)
Waiver and Forfeiture (15)
Notices of Appeal (13)
Legal Writing (12)
Appealability and Appealable Orders (12)
Splits of Authority (9)
Stays on Appeal (9)
Dismissals (9)
Sanctions (8)
Motions for Reconsideration (8)
Oral Argument (8)
Appealability (8)
Attorney Fees (7)
New Trial Motions (7)
Federal Courts (7)
Arbitration (6)
Anti-SLAPP (6)
Civility (6)
Unpublished Opinions (6)
Statements of Decision (6)
Record on Appeal (6)
Respondent Arguments (6)
Briefing (6)
Ninth Circuit (6)
Timeliness (6)
Appellate Sanctions (5)
Disqualification (5)
Family Law (5)
CCP 998 Offers (5)
Posttrial Motions (5)
Dissents (5)
Judgment Enforcement (5)
Preliminary Injunctions (5)
Evidentiary Objections (5)
Substantial Evidence (5)
Implied Findings (5)
Trial Procedure (5)
Appellate Bonds (4)
Admission of Improper Evidence (4)
Standards of Review (4)
Discovery (4)
Jurisdiction (4)
California Supreme Court (4)
Default Judgments (4)
Experts (4)
Writ Petitions (4)
Stipulated Judgments (4)
Motions in Limine (4)
Frivolous Motions (3)
Juror Peremptory Challenges (3)
Exclusion of Evidence (3)
Notices of Entry (3)
Timely and Untimely Appeals (3)
Appellate Practice (3)
Depublished Opinions (3)
Summary Judgments and Summary Adjudications (3)
Motions to Vacate and Set Aside Judgments (3)
Summary Judgments (3)
Mootness (3)
Summary Judgment (3)
Dismissed Appeals (3)
Ethical Duty of Candor (3)
Appealable Orders (3)
Trial Strategy (3)
Excessive Damages (3)
Standing (3)
Trust and Probate (3)
Stays (3)
Probate Appeals (3)
Judicial Admissions (2)
Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility (2)
Petitions for Review (2)
Contempt (2)
Attorney Client Privilege (2)
Forfeiture and Waiver (2)
PAGA Actions (2)
Litigation Tips (2)
Recovery of Costs (2)
Standards of Evidence (2)
Jury Waivers (2)
Personal Jurisdiction (2)
Expert Opinions (2)
Tentative Rulings (2)
Motions to Dismiss (2)
Landlord Tenant (2)
Collateral Orders (2)
Judicial Bias (2)
Appeals Dismissed (2)
Invited Error (2)
Settlements (2)
Waiver (2)
Untimeliness (2)
Appeals Treated as Writs (2)
Pretrial Procedure (2)
Pretrial Issues (2)
Disentitlement Doctrine (2)
Class Actions (2)
Demurrers (2)
Motions to Vacate (2)
Mischief (2)
Civil Theft (1)
Treble Damages (1)
Premises Liability (1)
Frivolous Appeals (1)
Post-Appellate Issues (1)
Referral Fees (1)
Trial by Reference and Pro Tem Judges (1)
PAGA Attorney Fees (1)
Law and Motion (1)
Issue Selection on Appeal (1)
Remote Arguments (1)
Attorney Feese (1)
Employment Law (1)
Common Interest Doctrine (1)
Juror Misconduct (1)
Product Liability (1)
Clear and Convincing (1)
ADA and Unruh Accessibility Actions (1)
Clerks Service of File Stamped Judgment (1)
Designating the Record (1)
Trade Restraints (1)
Civil Code 3334 (1)
Benefits Obtained Trespass Damages (1)
Trespass (1)
Property Rights (1)
Inherent Authority (1)
Support Awards (1)
Forfeiture (1)
PostJudgment Litigation (1)
Unsupported Arguments (1)
Petitions for Rehearing (1)
Judicial Notice (1)
Post Reversal (1)
Attorney Fees - CCP 1021.5 (1)
Moot Appeals (1)
Appellate Briefing (1)
Pleadings (1)
Judicial Estoppel (1)
Harmless Error (1)
Prejudicial Error (1)
Record Designation (1)
Typeface (1)
Typography (1)
Jury Instructions (1)
Precedent (1)
New Arguments (1)
Third Parties and Nonparties (1)
Ninth CircuitAbuse of Discretion (1)
Out-of-State Litigant (1)
Family Court (1)
Mediation (1)
Split Decisions (1)
Inconsistent Verdicts (1)
Punitive Damages (1)
Dicta (1)
Petitionf ro Review (1)
Legal Practice (1)
Finality and Final Orders (1)
DismissalsAppealability and Appealable Orders (1)
Motions to Quash (1)
Motions for Judgment on the Pleadings (1)
Federal Appeals (1)
Consenting to Judgments (1)
Alter Ego (1)
Post Reversal Issues (1)
Law of the Case (1)
Record (1)
Bankruptcy (1)
Local Rules (1)
Evidentiary Presumptions (1)
New Trial (1)
Exhaustion of Remedies (1)
Waived and Forfeiture (1)
Per Se Errors (1)
Review as Writ Petition (1)
Amicus Briefs (1)
Incorrect Decisions (1)
Attorney Misconduct (1)
Comments (1)
Restraining Orders (1)
Summary Reversal (1)
Retainer Agreements (0)
Professional Ethics (0)
Appellate (0)
Notice of Appeal (0)
Landlore Tenant (0)
Split of Authority (0)
No categories Legal Writing (0)
crossmenuchevron-down