The testimony of an expert in support of a motion for summary judgment or for summary adjudication of issues is usually presented through a declaration under penalty of perjury. CCP §2015.5. Here are five do’s and don’ts for these expert declarations.
The following is a guest blog post by Renee Galente Stackhouse. Renee is the founder and trial lawyer at Stackhouse, APC, where she focuses on plaintiff’s personal injury and military defense in San Diego. She is the immediate past President of California Women Lawyers, President of the CWL Foundation, Chair of the CLA SSF Section, and sits on the Board of the San Diego County Bar Association.
You would be surprised how easy it is to find public information on the Internet. Or maybe you wouldn’t, given the many stories of jobs lost and cases jeopardized by social media posts. Using Google and social media searches on parties and witnesses can be very helpful to your case, but make sure you don’t overstep.
Even when a litigant can’t assert a statutory privilege, private matters may nonetheless be protected from discovery under the constitutional right of privacy. Balancing the privacy interest at stake against the need for discovery has always been a difficult task. But a recent California Supreme Court case, Williams v Superior Court (2017) 3 C5th 531, has clarified the proper analysis to use.
Many lawyers view motions in limine as tools used only to exclude or limit particular evidence. But the experts know that a motion in limine is also a useful tool to admit evidence.