WebRifkind v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County, 123 Cal.App.3d 1045, 177 Cal.Rptr. 82 (1981); see Wells v. Wells, 108 Misc.2d 501, 437 N.Y.S.2d 622 (1981); Borg v. Borg, 32 … 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 …
Bezos Nabs $371K Fees After Appellate Win Over GF
WebColonial 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 ... 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 CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, ... contention questions at a deposition is Pember v. Superior Court (1966) 240 Cal.App.2d 888 [50 Cal.Rptr. Page 3 internships for public relations majors
How to File a Civil Lawsuit - North Carolina Bar Association
WebDec 1, 2000 · They are: (1) communications with potential defendant health care providers, and others within their group or employer’s practice; (2) securing and presenting evidence with respect to prior misdeeds by health care providers relevant to corporate negligence claims; (3) inadequate disclosure in response to Court Rules and interrogatories relating … WebSep 30, 1981 · ROBERT GORE RIFKIND, Petitioner, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY, Respondent; GOGI GRANT RIFKIND, Real Party in Interest. Court of Appeals of California, Second District, Division Four. September 30, 1981. Attorney (s) appearing for the Case COUNSEL Belcher, Henzie, Biegenzahn, Chertok & Walker and … WebThe Rifkind laundry list. This is a good place to interpose a Rifkind objection also. Rifkind v. Sup. Ct. (Good) (1994) 22 Cal.App.4th 1255, 1259, stands for the proposition that it is improper to ask your client for legal contentions and the evidence supporting legal theories such as causation, damages, apportionment of fault. That is what ... internships for screenwriting students