The Recorder offers Judges Catch a Break on Summary Judgment: Legislation signed by the governor makes clear that judges can ignore mountains of meaningless evidentiary objections. [The DJ's print headline about this is a classic: "Judges To Avoid Ruling On All Motions"]
[The MetNews reports in Brown Signs Bill on Evidentiary Objections in Summary Judgment:
The bill, which was also backed by the California Chamber of Commerce and the Civil Justice Association of California, adds Code of Civil Procedure §437c(q), reading as follows:
“In granting or denying a motion for summary judgment or summary adjudication, the court need rule only on those objections to evidence that it deems material to its disposition of the motion. Objections to evidence that are not ruled on for purposes of the motion shall be preserved for appellate review.”
The legislation essentially codifies, and expands upon, Reid v. Google, Inc. (2010) 50 Cal.4th 512, which held that if a trial court fails to rule expressly on specific evidentiary objections, it is presumed that the objections have been overruled, the trial court considered the evidence in ruling on the merits of the summary judgment motion, and the objections are preserved on appeal.]
The Recorder also presents Justice Beds' latest Criminal Waste of Space: The Ancient Art of Fake Wrestling
Yesterday's DJ presented Death of the death knell doctrine, by Reed Smith's Jim Martin, Anne Grignon, and Sara Stratton. The article begins:
Every appellate specialist knows a final judgment is the key that unlocks the door to the appellate realm. There are, however, a handful of statutory and common law exceptions to that immutable finality requirement, and one of the most well-established is the so-called "death knell" doctrine. That doctrine applies to orders, like the denial of class certification, that effectively end the litigation. See Daar v. Yellow Cab Co., 67 Cal. 2d 695, 699 (1967). Indeed, in the context of orders denying class certification, this exception to the final judgment requirement is so firmly entrenched that the failure to immediately appeal the order can result in the waiver of the right to appeal that ruling when the action concludes. See Stephen v. Enterprise Rent-A-Car, 235 Cal. App. 3d 806, 811 (1991).The Federal Circuit Bar Association presents a webinar on Writing Effective Appellate Briefs, Sept. 16 from 2 to 4 EST, with Fed. Cir. Judge Richard Taranto on the panel. Details here.