How must an attorney preserve confidential information?

Useful Resources for Confidential Information

Recent Rulings on Confidential Information

1-25 of 10000 results

LONG-HIM TANG, ET AL. VS PATRICIA PONCE DE LEON

Tang states that on information and belief, he incurred $768 in special damages because that was the amount Kaiser Permanente paid for his treatment. Counsel’s declaration authenticates a schedule from The Rawlings Company which breaks down the cost of Tang’s medical care. This evidence is sufficient to prove-up Tang’s special damages. The evidence is not, however, sufficient to support an award of $500,000 for pain and suffering.

  • Hearing

    Mar 26, 2021

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

HAI THANH LUU VS GEORGE KONGAIKA

N/A Attorney fees if supported by contract, statute or law. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(9); Local R. 3.214; open book – CC 1717.5.) See above_____ Interest computations. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(3); 10% for contracts - Civ. Code 3289.) Yes Memorandum of costs and disbursements. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(4); JC Form CIV-100 item 7.) Yes Declaration of nonmilitary status for each defendant. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(5); JC Form CIV-100 item 8.) Yes Proposed form of judgment. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(6).) N/A Statement of Damages served (P.I.

  • Hearing

    Jan 28, 2021

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

CONS. OF DEANDRE MARQUIES ALEWINE

File original signature on verification of Confidential Supplemental Information Form GC-312 or verified declaration to attach a corrected face page in compliance with LR 2.80 et seq. and CRC § 2.300 et seq. regarding facsimile filing. Notes: 1. No temporary orders are currently in place. 2. It appears Atty. Randolph Stein is appointed as counsel for proposed conservatee; however, no order is on file.

  • Hearing

    Jan 27, 2021

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

PUBLIC ADMINISTRATOR RE: PET’N FOR APPT OF CTR OF PERS/ESTATE

File a verified declaration to address Item # 1.e. on Child Information Attachment Form GC-210 (CA) 3. File Confidential Guardian Screening Form GC-212 4. Submit Order Appointing Guardian of Minor Form GC-240 (revised 7-1-16) The Court is waiting for these items: Further report of Atty. Oliver Greenwood Notes: 1. Court will set a review hearing to deposit of funds into blocked account established for each minor. 2. Letters of Guardianship of Person issued to petitioner and Ryan Leuschen 10-2-19. 3.

  • Hearing

    Jan 25, 2021

  • Judge

    Fenstermacher

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

DAVID ROSS, ET AL. VS JUSTIN MONEMPOUR, AN INDIVIDUAL AND AS TRUSTEE MARTEL TRUST,

For more information, please contact the court clerk at (213) 633-0517. Your understanding during these difficult times is appreciated.

  • Hearing

    Jan 22, 2021

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Quiet Title

ELINTON GRAMAJO VS JOE'S PIZZA ON SUNSET INC ET AL

For more information, please contact the court clerk at (213) 633-0517. Your understanding during these difficult times is appreciated.

  • Hearing

    Jan 22, 2021

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

LILIA NILA GARCIA, ET AL. VS RAFAEL RODRIGUEZ ZAVALZA, ET AL.

Sanctions are sought against Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs’ attorney of record. However, Defendants do not describe any conduct warranting sanctions against Plaintiffs directly; rather, the subpoenas were served by Plaintiffs’ attorney of record. Sanctions are imposed against Plaintiffs’ attorney of record only. Plaintiffs’ attorney of record is ordered to pay sanctions to Defendants, by and through their attorney of record, in the total amount of $1,290, within twenty days.

  • Hearing

    Jan 22, 2021

JACQUELINE GIBSON VS BERNARD WINGFIELD, ET AL.

“If a deponent fails to answer any question or to produce any document, electronically stored information, or tangible thing under the deponent's control that is specified in the deposition notice or a deposition subpoena, the party seeking discovery may move the court for an order compelling that answer or production.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.480(a).)

  • Hearing

    Jan 22, 2021

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

MANUEL KAZANJIAN VS. ADRIEN VINCENT SEVERO, ET AL.

Stepanyan (counsel for Contractor Defendants) states that on April 16, 2020, Menco’s counsel requested information about where payment was to be issued, and Mr. Stepanyan provided the mailing address and W9 of a third-party adjuster for their insurer. (Id., ¶4, Ex. B.) He states, however, that Menco has refused to comply with the terms of the settlement by failing to pay the $2,500 amount within 30 days of execution of the agreement (i.e., May 20, 2020). (Id., ¶5.)

  • Hearing

    Jan 22, 2021

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

JASMINE MARIE ACOSTA VS DANN FRANK SARNOSKI ET AL

Plaintiff contends it does not list any specific tests that will be performed or other information. Finally, Plaintiff contends Defendants unreasonably delayed in seeking this IME, as Defendants have always known the severity of Plaintiff’s injuries. In reply, Defendants argue that Plaintiff concedes she is claiming neurological injuries and ignores these injuries were not previously evaluated. Moreover, Defendants argue the moving papers sufficiently set forth the manner of the proposed examination.

  • Hearing

    Jan 22, 2021

IN RE: THE MATTER OF OECHSLE FAMILY MARITAL TRUST DTD. JULY 26, 1984

For general information regarding Judge Lund and his courtroom rules and procedures, please visit: http://www.judgerogerlund.com.

  • Hearing

    Jan 21, 2021

  • Type

    Probate

  • Sub Type

    Trust

IN RE THE KALEB CAMPUZANO IRREVOCABLE SPECIAL NEEDS TRUST ESTABLISHED ON SEPTEMBER 24, 2013

The information contained in financial statements is such that would be ordinarily disclosed in a court accounting or an inventory and appraisal. Therefore they are not considered "Confidential" absent an affidavit describing the confidential character of the document. Conservator may redact partial account numbers when filing financial statements with the Court. The Court shall file the statements in the regular court file not in the "confidential" court file.

  • Hearing

    Jan 21, 2021

  • Type

    Probate

  • Sub Type

    Trust

HYNDS VS VICI INCORPORATED

Lack of personal knowledge regarding confidential information at mediation. 6. Overruled. 7. Sustained in part. Sustained as to agreement presented to other employees. Irrelevant. 8. Sustained in part. Hearsay as to # of hours spent by other employees. Lack of personal knowledge of the declarant as to other attorney hours. 9. Sustained. Legal conclusion and speculation. 10. Sustained. Irrelevant.

  • Hearing

    Jan 21, 2021

SG BLOCKS, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION VS EDI INTERNATIONAL, PC WHICH WILL DO BUSINESS IN CALIFORNIA AS EDI INTERNATIONAL CALIFORNIA, A NEW JERSEY CORPORATION

Contrary to Opposing Defendants’ arguments, the motion and accompanying declaration sufficiently identify the changes being made to the FAC, as Plaintiff provides the requisite information by means of the redlined version of the FAC. The Court thus turns to the remaining arguments.

  • Hearing

    Jan 21, 2021

  • Type

    Business

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

SANDRA SANCHEZ VS CITY OF LONG BEACH, ET AL.

Plaintiff states the information contained in the declaration was articulated by Plaintiff to Mr. Castro in Spanish prior to Castro’s writing the declaration in English. Plaintiff affirms the truth and accuracy of the information stated therein. Defendant does not object to counsel’s translation, and thus the court considers the declaration. Plaintiff met Mr. Castro at the scene of the incident on December 29, 2020 at approximately 11:30 a.m.

  • Hearing

    Jan 21, 2021

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

JOHN DOE 7001 VS MARK MOSBY, ET AL.

The portions of the documents that Plaintiff wishes to be sealed are those that identify his true name and his parents, information which could be used to identify him despite his pseudonymous prosecution. (Motion at p. 5.) The moving papers that are currently on file are already redacted to remove this information from public view.

  • Hearing

    Jan 21, 2021

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

TONTI V. CAPO BY THE SEA, INC.

Although Capo is the prevailing party, the late request for attorney fees is denied as the request was first made in Capo’s reply brief, which is improper as they were not properly noticed and Plaintiff was not given the opportunity to respond to the new issue. CRC Rule 3.1110(a) and CCP § 2023.040. The Capo Motion is granted, with the exception of the attorney fee request. Depala is to produce documents responsive to the subpoena but limited to the 10-years preceding the date of production.

  • Hearing

    Jan 21, 2021

MIKE KOBEISSI, ET AL. VS HUSSEIN KOBEISSI, ET AL.

The statutory sections provide in relevant part: (a) A person who, intentionally and without the consent of all parties to a confidential communication, uses an electronic amplifying or recording device to … record the confidential communication, whether the communication is carried on among the parties in the presence of one another or by means of a … telephone, or other device, … shall be punished by a fine not exceeding two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500) per violation, or imprisonment in a county

  • Hearing

    Jan 21, 2021

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. V. SCOTT HARRIS

Plaintiff’s motion did not request sanctions nor did its attorney’s declaration provide the court with any information from which it could determine an amount of reasonable attorney’s fees as an appropriate sanction. Since sanctions regarding this motion are mandatory (see C.C.P. §2033.280 (c)), a monetary sanction in the amount of the $90.00 filing fee for the motion is imposed on Defendant, payable within thirty (30) days of the entry of this order.

  • Hearing

    Jan 21, 2021

SUPERIOR COURT VS. MORTGAGE LENDER SERVICES

The delay in responding also waives the option to produce writings in under Code of Civil Procedure, § 2030.230 in lieu of the information contained within them (Code of Civil Procedure, § 2030.290(a).) There are some case law exceptions to waiver. One case holds that a party may obtain a protective order limiting discovery of objectionable information even after they have waived their right to object. (Stadish v. Superior Court (Southern Calif. Gas Co.) (1999) 71 Cal.App.4th 1130,1144).

  • Hearing

    Jan 21, 2021

MRC II DISTRIBUTION COMPANY, L.P., A DELAWARE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP VS DE PACIFIC 9665, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY

Legal Standard “If a deponent fails to answer any question or to produce any document, electronically stored information, or tangible thing under the deponent's control that is specified in the deposition notice or a deposition subpoena, the party seeking discovery may move the court for an order compelling that answer or production.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.480(a)).)

  • Hearing

    Jan 21, 2021

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

STEVE CANCHOLA, ET AL. V. MERRILL & ASSOCIATES REAL ESTATE, ET AL.

The Strouds’ attorney (Chase Martin) states that once he was retained, he met and conferred with Attorney Connell regarding the documents sought. Attorney Martin understood from those discussion that Kleck was not interested in obtaining documents which had already been produced but was instead seeking communications between Plaintiffs and the Strouds with respect to the real property at issue in the current litigation. (Martin Decl., ¶ 4.)

  • Hearing

    Jan 21, 2021

GEORGE CASTRO VS LOS ANGELES COUNTY PROBATION DEPARTMENT

For more information, please contact the court clerk at (213) 633-0517. Your understanding during these difficult times is appreciated.

  • Hearing

    Jan 21, 2021

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

CITIZENS BUSINESS BANK, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION VS 30SIXTY ADVERTISING & DESIGN, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL.

Bank also seeks estimated attorney fees of $10,000 but fails to support this amount with an attorney declaration or statutory basis and they are denied. 3. Probability of Success Bank alleges that it has established that Fuscellaro and Larsson have each failed to meet their obligations under the Guaranties. App. at 7-8. The Note and the Loan Agreement evidence the obligations between Bank and the Corporation, and the Guaranties establish that Guarantors guaranteed Corporation’s debts.

  • Hearing

    Jan 21, 2021

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

SAIF HUSSAIN VS LOS ANGELES COUNTY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTERICT

. § 2033.240(c) requires that “the attorney for the responding party shall sign any response that contains an objection,” Plaintiff provides no grounds that Defendant’s responses, which are verified, waive all objections because they did not contain a signature of counsel.

  • Hearing

    Jan 21, 2021

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 400     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we load this page.