§Why CasetextPricing

RIVERSIDE COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT v. STIGLITZ

Intervener, Riverside Sheriff’s Association, and Real Party in Interest, Kristy Drinkwater, Letter Brief

21 Cited authorities

  1. Pitchess v. Superior Court

    11 Cal.3d 531 (Cal. 1974)   Cited 2,716 times
    Concluding defendant made a good faith showing in support of his discovery motion where "the information which defendant seeks may have considerable significance to the preparation of his defense, and the documents have been requested with adequate specificity to preclude the possibility that defendant is engaging in a 'fishing expedition' "

  2. Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc.

    16 Cal.4th 953 (Cal. 1997)   Cited 597 times   12 Legal Analyses
    Holding "plaintiffs may prove causation in asbestos-related cancer cases by demonstrating that the plaintiff's [or decedent's] exposure to defendant's asbestos-containing product in reasonable medical probability was a substantial factor in contributing to the aggregate dose of asbestos the plaintiff or decedent inhaled or ingested, and hence to the risk of developing asbestos-related cancer"

  3. Kowis v. Howard

    3 Cal.4th 888 (Cal. 1992)   Cited 518 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Acknowledging that Consumers Lobby is an exception to the general rule

  4. Addison v. State of California

    21 Cal.3d 313 (Cal. 1978)   Cited 588 times
    Holding a statute of limitations for filing suit may be tolled while plaintiff pursues the claim in another forum

  5. Walker v. Superior Court

    53 Cal.3d 257 (Cal. 1991)   Cited 310 times
    In Walker v. Superior Court, supra, 53 Cal.3d at page 267, 279 Cal.Rptr. 576, 807 P.2d 418, we noted that while section 128 sets out some of the courts' inherent powers, those powers are derived from the California Constitution (art.

  6. Bauguess v. Paine

    22 Cal.3d 626 (Cal. 1978)   Cited 194 times
    Holding attorney's fees was improper use of supervisory powers

  7. People v. Castello

    65 Cal.App.4th 1242 (Cal. Ct. App. 1998)   Cited 109 times
    Finding no express incorporation of the limitations of Code Civ. Proc., § 1008, into criminal cases, but finding inherent court power

  8. Greyhound Corp. v. Superior Court

    56 Cal.2d 355 (Cal. 1961)   Cited 291 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.

  9. Cottle v. Superior Court

    3 Cal.App.4th 1367 (Cal. Ct. App. 1992)   Cited 116 times
    Holding that, under the California Constitution, a trial court may use its inherent powers to manage complex tort litigation by ordering the exclusion of expert evidence if the plaintiff is unable to establish a prima facie case after complete discovery but before trial

  10. Peat, Marwick, Mitchell Co. v. Superior Court

    200 Cal.App.3d 272 (Cal. Ct. App. 1988)   Cited 78 times
    Noting a trial court's "order precluding evidence [was] not a sanction for the abuse of discovery procedures, but [was] a remedy for abuse of the litigation process" and concluding the order was authorized under "[t]he court's inherent power to curb abuses and promote fair process" which has been "flexibly applied in response to the many vagaries of the litigation process"