19 Cited authorities

State Farm Mut. Automobile Ins. Co. v. Campbell
538 U.S. 408 (2003) Cited 2,621 times 51 Legal Analyses
Holding that an award of $145 million in punitive damages on a $1 million compensatory verdict violated due process
Greyhound Corp. v. Superior Court
56 Cal.2d 355 (Cal. 1961) Cited 290 times 3 Legal Analyses
In Greyhound, the plaintiff in a personal injury suit arising from a car accident sought written statements that had been obtained from witnesses by the defendant's insurance adjusters and investigators.
Mock v. Michigan Millers Mutual Insurance
4 Cal.App.4th 306 (Cal. Ct. App. 1992) Cited 119 times
Explaining that "clear and convincing" requires a finding of high probability; that the evidence be "so clear as to leave no substantial doubt"; or that the evidence be "sufficiently strong to command the unhesitating assent of every reasonable mind."
Flagship Theatres of Palm Desert, LLC v. Century Theatres, Inc.
198 Cal.App.4th 1366 (Cal. Ct. App. 2011) Cited 28 times
Noting federal law's antitrust injury requirement applies to claims under the Cartwright Act
Romo v. Ford Motor Co.
113 Cal.App.4th 738 (Cal. Ct. App. 2003) Cited 37 times
Upholding a punitive-to-compensatory damage award ratio of 5-to-1
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"
Moore v. American United Life Ins. Co.
150 Cal.App.3d 610 (Cal. Ct. App. 1984) Cited 58 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that employee is totally disabled unless he is capable of "working with reasonable continuity in his customary occupation or in any other occupation in which he might reasonably be expected to engage."
Colonial Life Accident Ins. Co. v. Superior Court
31 Cal.3d 785 (Cal. 1982) Cited 60 times 2 Legal Analyses
Ruling that based on California's version of Rule 26(b), encompassing an identical minimal relevance standard, "Colonial's suggestion that the discovery of other insureds whose claims were negotiated by Sharkey will not yield relevant, admissible evidence, is patently meritless"
Townsend v. Superior Court
61 Cal.App.4th 1431 (Cal. Ct. App. 1998) Cited 22 times
Docket No. B116602. March 10, 1998. Appeals from Superior Court of Santa Barbara County, No. 207853, Frank J. Ochoa, Judge. COUNSEL Joseph W. Fairfield for Petitioners. No appearance for Respondent. Lori S. Carver, Mark E. Schiffman, Shapiro Miles, T. Robert Finlay, Myer, Paynter Fock, Erich E. Fock and Haws, Record, Williford Magnusson for Real Parties in Interest. OPINION STONE (S.J.), P.J. Here we determine that the requirement of informal resolution, as set forth in section 2025, subdivision
Glenfed Dev. Corp. v. Superior Court
53 Cal.App.4th 1113 (Cal. Ct. App. 1997) Cited 19 times
Docket No. B108546. March 27, 1997. Appeal from Superior Court of Los Angeles County, No. BC131389, Frances Rothschild, Judge. COUNSEL Cox, Castle Nicholson, Jeffrey D. Masters and Mark Moore for Petitioner. No appearance for Respondent. Horvitz Levy, Peter Abrahams, Andrea M. Gauthier, Murtaugh, Miller, Meyer Nelson, Bradford H. Miller and Gregory M. Heuser for Real Party in Interest. OPINION VOGEL (Miriam A.), J. — BACKGROUND Several lawsuits alleging construction defects were filed against Glenfed
Section 2031.310 - Motion for order compelling further response
Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 2031.310 Cited 116 times
Authorizing a motion to compel further response on the ground an objection is without merit
Section 2030.090 - Motion for protective order
Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 2030.090 Cited 20 times
Listing grounds for a protective order, including "unwarranted annoyance" and "undue burden and expense"
Section 17 - "Oath" defined
Cal. Health & Saf. Code § 17 Cited 2 times
"Oath" includes affirmation. Ca. Health and Saf. Code § 17 Enacted by Stats. 1939, Ch. 60.
Section 164.514 - Other requirements relating to uses and disclosures of protected health information
45 C.F.R. § 164.514 Cited 98 times 40 Legal Analyses
Defining de-identified information

Michael Olson vs. California Physicians' Service, A California Corporation

19 Cited authorities

Holding that an award of $145 million in punitive damages on a $1 million compensatory verdict violated due process

In Greyhound, the plaintiff in a personal injury suit arising from a car accident sought written statements that had been obtained from witnesses by the defendant's insurance adjusters and investigators.

Explaining that "clear and convincing" requires a finding of high probability; that the evidence be "so clear as to leave no substantial doubt"; or that the evidence be "sufficiently strong to command the unhesitating assent of every reasonable mind."

Noting federal law's antitrust injury requirement applies to claims under the Cartwright Act

Upholding a punitive-to-compensatory damage award ratio of 5-to-1

Holding that a party seeking discovery must make a "particularized showing" that "the information sought is essential to a fair resolution of the lawsuit"

Holding that employee is totally disabled unless he is capable of "working with reasonable continuity in his customary occupation or in any other occupation in which he might reasonably be expected to engage."

Ruling that based on California's version of Rule 26(b), encompassing an identical minimal relevance standard, "Colonial's suggestion that the discovery of other insureds whose claims were negotiated by Sharkey will not yield relevant, admissible evidence, is patently meritless"

Authorizing a motion to compel further response on the ground an objection is without merit

Listing grounds for a protective order, including "unwarranted annoyance" and "undue burden and expense"

Defining de-identified information