New Lee v. Silveira case extends Howell analysis, holding that in order to prevail under C.C.P. Section 998, plaintiff can use only the negotiated rate differential in determining whether he/she did “better” than the statutory offer – not the gross amount the jury may have awarded. Be sure to read our other Howell related posts.
Court of Appeal holds that a party’s denials of requests for admissions are inadmissible at trial ,where a party’s conduct in litigation is not in issue. The First District Court of Appeal ruled yesterday that a party’s denial or lack of admission in response to requests for admissions cannot be used for impeachment purposes. The …
Dear Friends and Colleagues: The following informative update has been received from a colleague, and I pass it along as it touches on aspects of Medicare and other insurer reimbursement, particularly in the context of charges disputed because they are asserted to be excessive. Please let me know if you would like to discuss any …
Defense counsel made a motion in limine to preclude plaintiff from offering expert witness testimony based on the contention that plaintiff’s failure to disclose expert information was unreasonable. The trial court agreed, and that decision was upheld on appeal. The Third District reasoned that while C.C.P. §2034.300 did not mandate exclusion of plaintiff’s expert testimony because the defendant did not timely comply with the disclosure date, there is nothing in C.C.P. §2034.300 that would preclude the court from exercising its discretion to exclude the testimony based on the plaintiff’s “egregious violation” of the exchange requirements.
California appellate courts continue to impose limits on punitive damages. On August 29, a 10-1 limit on punitive damages was upheld. In Nickerson v. Stonebridge Life Ins. Co. (link below), the jury awarded plaintiff $35,000 in damages for bad faith insurance denial of benefits and $19 million in punitive damages. The trial court remitted the …
An important Howell-related decision, State Farm Auto Ins. Co. v. Huff (June 11, 2013), was published today by the California Appellate Court, Fourth Appellate District, Division One, holding that enforcing a lien under the Hospital Lien Act ( C.C. Section 3045.1, et seq.) requires a hospital to demonstrate the reasonableness and necessity of its claimed …
Earlier today, the California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Three, issued its opinion in the matter of Corenbaum v. Lampkin, holding, inter alia, that “evidence of the full amount billed [for past medical services] is . . . inadmissible for the purpose of proving noneconomic damages.” The decision is highly significant inasmuch as …
The LA Superior Court recently announced a $30 millon reduction plan in further response to the budget cuts they’ve encountered over the past ten years. As a result of the reduction, 24 civil courtrooms will close, and, effective May 15, 2012, the court will no longer provide court reporters for civil trials. Therefore, counsel and …
