3) Discovery, Trial, Appeals

Question 1

dy: scope

Answer 1

1) unless otherwise limited by court order, anything not privileged that is admissible or appears reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence
2) dy rules are liberalyl constructed

Question 2

dy: methods

Answer 2

1) depos
2) irogs
3) inspection of docs/things
4) mental or physical exam
5) rq adm
6) exchange testifying expert’s opinions

Question 3

depos: scope

Answer 3

must be w/in CA

can be parties or nonparties (need subpoena)

Question 4

depos: written

Answer 4

it’s possible, need to send the qs w the notice

Question 5

irogs: number

Answer 5

35 spl

any form

Question 6

irogs: continuing?

Answer 6

no –> no duty to supplement or correct answers

Question 7

dy: phys or mental exam: when?

Answer 7

party can rq if other party has put their physical or mental condition in controversy

Question 8

rq admissions: content

Answer 8

admit the genuineness of document OR truth fo a fact

Question 9

rq admissions: number

Answer 9

35 that aren’t about genuineness of docs

however many re genuineness of docs as long as not unduly burdensome

Question 10

expert info exchange: timing

Answer 10

after setting of initial trial date, any party may demand simultaneous exchange of expert TRIAL WITNESS info

Question 11

expert info exchange: content

Answer 11

re trial wits only

1) qualifications
2) substance of tmony
3) statement that expert has agreed to testify
4) expert is familiar w the pending action
5) fees

Question 12

dy: protective order: def

Answer 12

court for good cause may make any order that justice requires to protect any party or other natural person or org from unwarranted annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, undue burden/expense

Question 13

dy: sanctions: process

Answer 13

if misuse of dy, court must give ntc + hearing

Question 14

dy: sanctions: kinds

Answer 14

1) monetary
2) issue statements (jury inst)
3) evidence limits
4) terminating case

Question 15

dy: privilege

Answer 15

1) A-C
2) work-product (similar to fed)
3) privacy rights

Question 16

MSJ: timing

Answer 16

must serve on all other parties at least 75 days before hg

Question 17

MSJ: standard

Answer 17

same as fed ct (no genuine dispute of material fact + mvt entitled to judgment as MOL)

Question 18

MSJ: form

Answer 18

ntc of mxn, mmpo, statement of undisputed facts

Question 19

mxn for judgment on the pleadings: def

Answer 19

like a mxn to dismiss after answer filed

can be sua sponte

Question 20

mxn for judgment on the pleadings: ok even if

Answer 20

1) demurrer made by MP on same grounds was overruled (IF material change in law)
2) MP did not demur on these grounds before

Question 21

demurrer: when

Answer 21

ok demur to answer

Question 22

voluntary dismissal: timing

Answer 22

P can dismiss any or all claims ANY TIME BEFORE TRIAL STARTS

more generous than fed

Question 23

involuntary dismissal: kinds

Answer 23

1) discretionary

2) mandatory

Question 24

involuntary dismissal: discretionary: rule

Answer 24

failure to prosecute

Question 25

involuntary dismissal: mandatory: rule

Answer 25

1) lack of service (not served in 3 years) or

2) failure to come to trial (case not tried w/in 5 years of filed)

Question 26

pretrial conference: purpose

Answer 26

1) set date of trial
2) determine procedures for trial
3) finalize evidence to be used at trial

Question 27

severance of trial issues: rule

Answer 27

split claims where nec for convenience or to avoid prejudice

Question 28

joint trials/consolidation: rule

Answer 28

separate actions can be brought together if common q of law or fact

Question 29

mixed judge + jury trials

Answer 29

different from frcp!

1) equity-first rule
2) equitable clean-up doctrine

Question 30

judge/jury: equity first rule: Def

Answer 30

equitable issues (injunctions, sometimes restitution) are tried by bench first, then legal issues tried by jury

Question 31

judge/jury: equitable clean-up doctrine: def

Answer 31

bench can also hear legal issues incidental to equitable issues (like small amt damages)

Question 32

jury verdict:

Answer 32

75% (different frcp!)

Question 33

jury trial: demand

Answer 33

must demand at commencement of action or is waived

Question 34

jury: number of peremptory challenges

Answer 34

6/side

can require explanation for strikes that raise inference of discrim

Question 35

jury: challenges for cause: kinds

Answer 35

1) individual jurors (ex. for bias)

2) can challenge entire jury panel on grounds that dn fairly rep the com

Question 36

mxn nonsuit: def

Answer 36

D can move for judgment of nonsuit on a claim after:

1) P has completed her opening, or
2) P has presented P’s evidence to the jury

Question 37

mxn: directed verdict: when + rule

Answer 37

either party can request, at close of all the evidence

court considers only sufficiency of evidence in support of claims (ignores all contrary evidence)

Question 38

mxn: JNOV (judgment notwithstanding the verdict)

Answer 38

post-trial

challenges jury verdict

Question 39

mxn new trial: grounds

Answer 39

inherently statutory –> court dnh inherent power

Question 40

mxn new trial: reasons allowed

Answer 40

1) newly discovered evidence OR
2) misconduct of jury
(others)

Question 41

mxns in nonjury trials: kinds

Answer 41

1) correction or amendment of judgment

2) relief from judgment

Question 42

nonjury mxn: correction/amendment of judgment: def

Answer 42

correction can be made for clerical errors only

Question 43

nonjuyr mxn: relief from judgment: kinds

Answer 43

1) mistkae/etc

2) additur/remittitur

Question 44

nonjury mxn: relief from judgment: mistake/etc: timing

Answer 44

w/in reasonable time, but no later than 6 mo after judgment

Question 45

nonjury mxn: relief from judgment: mistake/etc: grounds

Answer 45

1) mistake
2) inadvertence
3) surprise
4) excusable neglect
(same as defaults)

Question 46

nonjury mxn: additur: def

Answer 46

rq for increase in damages awarded

Question 47

nonjury mxn: remittitur: def

Answer 47

mxn to decrease awarded damages

Question 48

subsequent cases: primary-right doctrine: def

Answer 48

litigant can bring new coa in subsequent lawsuit if it’s for a violation of a separate, unlitigated primary right (car damage/personal injury)

CA different from most places: occurrence or transaction doctrine (all coas re single incident must be brought in same suit)

Question 49

subsequent: res judicata: aka

Answer 49

claim preclusion

Question 50

subsequent: collateral estoppel: aka

Answer 50

issue preclusion

Question 51

subsequent: claim preclusion: test

Answer 51

1) same parties
2) final judgment on the merits
3) same claim or COA
4) claim was or could have been litigated in first suit

Question 52

subsequent: issue preclusion: test

Answer 52

1) identicality of issues (in the 2 lawsuits)
2) issue was actually litigated
3) + finally determined + essential to the judgment
4) party against whom preclusion is sought was a party to the first lawsuit and had an opportunity to litigate the issue

Question 53

subsequent: “same parties”

Answer 53

works against any party IN PRIVITY WITH a party in prior lawsuit

CA expanded def of privity: “sufficiently close” rship to justify estoppel (so similarly situated that would have had incentives to litigate the same way)

(mutuality of estoppel no longer required)

Question 54

appeal: interlocutory appeals that can be made (kinds)

Answer 54

1) order granting or denying SJ
2) final judgment
3) o. new trial
4) o. denying jnov
5) o. granting or denying mxn injunctive relief
6) o. granting mxn quash service OR stay action for forum nonconveniens

Question 55

mandatory joinder for joint tortfeasor?

Answer 55

never

Question 56

arbitration: kinds

Answer 56

1) contractual

2) judicial

Question 57

arbitration: contractual: def

Answer 57

binding
subject to very limited court review –> ONLY FOR
1) corruption
2) prejudicial misconduct

Question 58

judicial arbitration: def

Answer 58

w consent of parties
nonbinding
court may order in cases involving less than 50k
either party can reject decision and take case to trial

Question 59

998 rule (rule of offers of judgment): rule

Answer 59

if offer refused, and offeree does not beat the offered settlement, then

1) offeree can’t obtain post-offer costs after rejecting the offer
2) offeree must pay costs of other party’s expert