§Why CasetextPricing

Opposition

Opposition

16 Cited authorities

  1. Lipton v. Superior Court

    48 Cal.App.4th 1599 (Cal. Ct. App. 1996)   Cited 104 times
    Recognizing that a reserve of money to deal with the claim cannot be equated with an admission of liability or the value of the claim

  2. Pac. Tel. & Tel. Co. v. Superior Court

    2 Cal.3d 161 (Cal. 1970)   Cited 131 times
    In Pacific Tel. Tel. Co. v. Superior Court (1970) 2 Cal.3d 161, 173 [ 84 Cal.Rptr. 718, 465 P.2d 854], it was stated: "... the relevance of the subject matter standard must be reasonably applied; in accordance with the liberal policies underlying the discovery procedures, doubts as to relevance should generally be resolved in favor of permitting discovery [citation]."

  3. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc. v. Superior Court

    7 Cal.App.4th 1384 (Cal. Ct. App. 1992)   Cited 45 times
    Holding that a party seeking discovery must make a "particularized showing" that "the information sought is essential to a fair resolution of the lawsuit"

  4. Gonzalez v. Superior Court

    33 Cal.App.4th 1539 (Cal. Ct. App. 1995)   Cited 24 times

    Docket No. B086213. April 11, 1995. Appeal from Superior Court of Los Angeles County, No. PC11501Z, John P. Farrell, Judge. COUNSEL Carol A. Sobel, Paul L. Hoffman, Sharon M. Robinson and John R. White for Petitioner. No appearance for Respondent. Ochoa Sillas and Jesse M. Jauregui for Real Parties in Interest. OPINION VOGEL (Miriam A.), J. We are called upon in this case to balance competing interests. On one side of the scale is a plaintiff's right to pursue a sexual harassment lawsuit uninhibited

  5. Davies v. Superior Court

    36 Cal.3d 291 (Cal. 1984)   Cited 34 times
    In Davies, a petitioner sought disclosure of California Highway Patrol accident data, which came under the confidentiality coverage of California Vehicle Code § 20012.

  6. Best Prods., Inc. v. Superior Court

    119 Cal.App.4th 1181 (Cal. Ct. App. 2004)   Cited 9 times
    Defining privilege log

  7. Pettie v. Superior Court

    178 Cal.App.2d 680 (Cal. Ct. App. 1960)   Cited 34 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Sustaining a judge's demurrer to a petition which sought review of a judicial decision because while the petitioner sought "a writ of mandate directed individually to the judge of the respondent court . . . . the judge of the court is not a proper party respondent in such a proceeding"

  8. Darbee v. Superior Court

    208 Cal.App.2d 680 (Cal. Ct. App. 1962)   Cited 5 times

    Docket No. 20672. October 19, 1962. PROCEEDING in mandamus to compel the Superior Court of San Mateo County to require answers to certain interrogatories. Peremptory writ granted. Brobeck, Phleger Harrison and David W. Lennihan for Petitioners. No appearance for Respondent. Erskine Tulley and Allen M. Singer for Real Party in Interest. MOLINARI, J. This is a petition for a writ of mandate seeking a direction to respondent that it grant petitioners' motion to compel the real party in interest, Julius

  9. Rule 5 - Serving and Filing Pleadings and Other Papers

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 5   Cited 22,753 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Allowing service by filing papers with the court's electronic-filing system

  10. Section 2023.030 - Sanctions for misuse of discovery process

    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 2023.030   Cited 504 times
    Providing for sanctions "[t]o the extent authorized by the chapter governing any particular discovery method"

  11. Section 2017.010 - Generally

    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 2017.010   Cited 138 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Allowing discovery of relevant non-privileged material

  12. Section 2031.240 - Objections

    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 2031.240   Cited 19 times

    (a) If only part of an item or category of item in a demand for inspection, copying, testing, or sampling is objectionable, the response shall contain a statement of compliance, or a representation of inability to comply with respect to the remainder of that item or category. (b) If the responding party objects to the demand for inspection, copying, testing, or sampling of an item or category of item, the response shall do both of the following: (1) Identify with particularity any document, tangible

  13. Section 4514 - Confidentiality of information and records; disclosure

    Cal. Welf. and Inst. Code § 4514   Cited 10 times

    All information and records obtained in the course of providing intake, assessment, and services under Division 4.1 (commencing with Section 4400), Division 4.5 (commencing with Section 4500), Division 6 (commencing with Section 6000), or Division 7 (commencing with Section 7100) to persons with developmental disabilities shall be confidential. Information and records obtained in the course of providing similar services to either voluntary or involuntary recipients before 1969 shall also be confidential

  14. Section 4400 - Department of Developmental Services

    Cal. Welf. and Inst. Code § 4400   Cited 2 times

    There is in the Health and Welfare Agency a State Department of Developmental Services. Ca. Welf. and Inst. Code § 4400 Added by Stats. 1977, Ch. 1252.

  15. Section 4515 - Consent for release of information

    Cal. Welf. and Inst. Code § 4515   Cited 1 times

    Signed consent forms by a person with a developmental disability or, where appropriate, the parent, guardian, or conservator, for release of any information to which such person consents under the provision of Sections 11878 or 11879 of the Health and Safety Code, or subdivision (a) or (d) of Section 4514 shall be obtained for each separate use with the use specified, the information to be released, the name of the agency or individual to whom information will be released indicated on the form and

  16. Section 4518 - Action against individual releasing confidential information or records

    Cal. Welf. and Inst. Code § 4518

    Any person may bring an action against an individual who has willfully and knowingly released confidential information or records concerning him or her in violation of the provisions of this chapter, or of Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 11860) of Part 3 of Division 10.5 of the Health and Safety Code, for the greater of the following amounts: (1) Five hundred dollars ($500). (2) Three times the amount of actual damages, if any, sustained by the plaintiff. Any person may, in accordance with the