§Why CasetextPricing

Motion_in_limine_opp_plts_mil_2

Motion

10 Cited authorities

  1. People v. Morris

    53 Cal.3d 152 (Cal. 1991)   Cited 573 times
    Requiring use of peremptory challenges and dissatisfaction with jury to claim erroneous denial of challenge for cause

  2. Corenbaum v. Lampkin

    215 Cal.App.4th 1308 (Cal. Ct. App. 2013)   Cited 132 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a defendant's failure to comply with the subpoena for financial records in the punitive phase of the trial, precludes the defendant from challenging the punitive damage awards based on lack of evidence of his financial condition or insufficiency of the evidence to establish his ability to pay the amount awarded

  3. People v. Jennings

    46 Cal.3d 963 (Cal. 1988)   Cited 224 times
    Concluding the defendant's statement to questioning police officer, that " 'I'm not going to talk'. . . . 'That's it. I shut up' " reflected "only momentary frustration and animosity" toward one of the officers and was not an invocation of his right to remain silent

  4. Bermudez v. Ciolek

    237 Cal.App.4th 1311 (Cal. Ct. App. 2015)   Cited 73 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Analyzing the trial record to determine whether sufficient evidence supported the jury's special verdict where the jury's answers were not factually inconsistent

  5. Kelly v. New West Federal Savings

    49 Cal.App.4th 659 (Cal. Ct. App. 1996)   Cited 119 times
    Granting of motions in limine prevented jury from hearing crucial evidence

  6. Pebley v. Santa Clara Organics, LLC

    22 Cal.App.5th 1266 (Cal. Ct. App. 2018)   Cited 20 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Remarking that “the uninsured plaintiff also must present additional evidence, generally in the form of expert opinion testimony, to establish that the amount billed is a reasonable value for the service rendered”

  7. Garfield v. Russell

    251 Cal.App.2d 275 (Cal. Ct. App. 1967)   Cited 18 times
    In Garfield, the court reversed a judgment for defendant in a personal injury action on the ground that the trial court erroneously admitted evidence of plaintiff's receipt of collateral insurance benefits for the purpose of showing plaintiff was a malingerer.

  8. Section 350 - Relevance

    Cal. Evid. Code § 350   Cited 1,655 times
    Providing only relevant evidence is admissible

  9. Section 780 - Factors to be considered in determining credibility

    Cal. Evid. Code § 780   Cited 1,179 times
    Listing factors court may consider in determining credibility of a witness

  10. Rule 2.251 - Electronic service

    Cal. R. 2.251   Cited 15 times

    (a)Authorization for electronic service When a document may be served by mail, express mail, overnight delivery, or fax transmission, the document may be served electronically under Code of Civil Procedure section 1010.6, Penal Code section 690.5, and the rules in this chapter. For purposes of electronic service made pursuant to Penal Code section 690.5, express consent to electronic service is required.[]= (Subd (a) amended effective January 1, 2022; previously amended effective January 1, 2007