site stats

Rifkind v. superior court 1994 22 ca 4th 1255

WebMay 27, 2024 · One case California litigators must have in their arsenal is Rifkind v. Superior Court, 22 Cal. App. 4th 1257 (1994). Counsel defending depositions will often lodge … WebFeb 26, 2024 · 4. Benson: A condominium construction defect lawsuit in Oregon, alleging black specks in the water due to deteriorating rubber on Victaulic valves. This claim …

Michael G. v. Super. Ct. - S271809 - Thu, 04/06/2024 California ...

WebThe fact that Mr. Rifkind filed an unverified answer to Mr. Good's lawsuit is no justification for requiring him to answer legal contention questions at his deposition. He retained an … (Singer v. Superior Court, 54 Cal. 2d 318, 323-325 [5 Cal. Rptr. 697, 353 P.2d 305]; … WebRifkind plaintiff to own their truth. It will legal contention objections because a question incorporates the term “discrimination” or “retaliation.” (Rifkind v. Superior Court (1994) 22 Cal.App.4th 1255.) You can object, but recognize the question presents the plaintiff with an opportunity to hit one out of the park. cincinnati to chillicothe ohio https://taoistschoolofhealth.com

Special interrogatories for a California divorce case

Web10-days plus 2 court days for fax, electronic, express, or overnight (with consent); ... (Rifkind v. Superior Court (1994) 22 Cal.App.4th 1255, 1263) and your attorney can object and instruct you not to answer. In case your attorney does not object and you do have to answer, then say, “I am sorry, but I do not know the answer to that question ... WebJul 6, 2024 · Case Summary On 07/06/2024 BRANDON HAWKINS filed a Property - Other Property Fraud lawsuit against VICTOR LAUGHLIN,. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Santa Monica Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are MARK A. YOUNG and LAWRENCE CHO. The case status … WebSuperior Court (1994) 22 Cal.App.4th 1255, in which the court condemned the practice of asking, at deposition, “legal contention questions,” such as by directing the witness to state “all facts that support the affirmative defense”; “the identity of each witness who has knowledge of any facts supporting the affirmative defense”; or the identity … cincinnati to cleveland mileage

Rifkind v. Superior Court, No. B075946 - California - Case Law

Category:Preparing plaintiffs to speak their truth in deposition and at …

Tags:Rifkind v. superior court 1994 22 ca 4th 1255

Rifkind v. superior court 1994 22 ca 4th 1255

THERE’S THIS CASE THAT SAYS . . . (Depositions) - Discovery …

WebDec 19, 2016 · Rifkind v. Superior Court (1994) 22 Cal.App.4th 1255, 1257 (emphasis added). And the law is well settled in California that the scope of discovery is very broad. Any doubts will be applied liberally in favor of discovery. These rules are applied liberally in … WebMar 1, 2024 · The court first discussed analogous cases, including Rifkind v. Superior Court (1994) 22 Cal.App.4th 1255, holding that it was improper to ask at deposition “ ‘legal contention questions,’ ” which questions were condemned as requiring the party “ ‘to make a “law-to-fact” application that is beyond the competence of most lay persons.’

Rifkind v. superior court 1994 22 ca 4th 1255

Did you know?

WebFN 4. Rifkind relies almost exclusively on applications of the federal due process clause, and he advances no reason why disposition of his federally based claim should not control the … WebMar 22, 2024 · Li (2015) 232 Cal. App. 4th 1406 and Rifkind v. Superior Court (1994) 22 Cal. App. 4th 1255, the Court reasoned that RFA denials are akin to improper contention questions posed at a deposition ...

WebMay 9, 2024 · The 10 causes of action are: 1) breach of contract; 2) breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing; 3) wrongful termination in violation of public policy; 4) violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), Government Code section 12900 (discrimination, harassment and retaliation); two violations of FEHA (Gov. Code, § 12940, … WebROBERT GORE RIFKIND, Petitioner, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY, Respondent; NED GOOD, Real Party in Interest. No. B075946. COURT OF APPEAL OF …

WebYes, it is the same thing if you seek documents. endstream Did I think this was ok or not? WebMay 31, 2024 · (Rifkind v. Superior Court (1994) 22 Cal.App.4th 1255.) With these goals and limitations in mind, there are several things to consider in deciding when and whose …

WebJul 28, 2024 · In Rifkind v. Superior Court (1994) 22 Cal.App.4th 1255, the deponent was instructed not to answer various “contention” questions. In response, the deposing party brought a motion to compel, which the court …

dht - listen to your heartWebFeb 23, 1994 · Superior Court (1994) 22 Cal.App.4th 1255, 1260, 27 Cal.Rptr.2d 13 Respondent's proposed undisputed fact number 10 stated at the time appellant leased the premises to respondent, re...... Planned Parenthood Fed'n of Am., Inc. v. Ctr. for Med. Progress, Case No. 16-cv-00236-WHO United States United States District Courts. 9th … cincinnati to clearwaterWebRifkind v. Superior Court (1994) 22 CA 4th 1255, 1259. Documents reviewed to prepare for deposition are discoverable. International Insurance Co. v. Montrose Chemical Corp. of California (1991) 231 CA3d 1367, 1372-73. However, privileged documents do not lose their privileged status (Sullivan v. Superior Court cincinnati to clarksburg wvWebColonial Western Agency, Inc. (2001) 87 Cal.App.4th 1006, 1015; Rifkind v. Superior Court (1994) 22 Cal.App.4th 1255, 1259.) The Rifkind court found that it is improper to ask a party to state its legal contentions during deposition (and such questions that essentially ask a deponent to apply facts to law on the spot should instead be asked in ... cincinnati to cleveland drivinghttp://www.advancedturbinesupport.com/4npwb13/pqe37g4s/article.php?tag=objection-to-demand-for-inspection-of-premises-california dht listen to your heart videoWebROBERT GORE RIFKIND, Petitioner, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY, Respondent; NED GOOD, Real Party in Interest. No. B075946. COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FOUR 22 Cal. App. 4th 1255; 27 Cal. Rptr. 2d 822; 1994 Cal. App. LEXIS 151; 94 Cal. Daily Op. Service 1359; 93 Daily Journal … cincinnati to columbus flights nonstopWebAn objection that every plaintiff lawyer should use is based upon Rifkind v. Sup. Ct. (Good) (1994) 22 Cal.App.4th 1255. Rifkind is a case you need to read if you defend depositions. … dht logistics