On June 22, 2020 a
Motion,Ex Parte
was filed
involving a dispute between
Hector, Elizabeth,
and
25847 E 9Th Street, Llc,
Anza Management Company, A Corporation,
Carmona, Schochill C,
Chavez, Schochill C,
Does 2 Through 50,
J.K. Residential Services, Inc.,
Sterling Estates, A Business Entity Form Unknown,
for Personal Injury Non-Motor Vehicle Unlimited
in the District Court of San Bernardino County.
Preview
MARTINIAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
“’3
KAVEH KESHMIRI ESQ. BAR No. 285348
|
F 7;
L E:
2801 CAHUENGA BOULEVARD WEST Sggfifi 8235:; 32:3,“an
SAN BERMARmNO Qumran
LOS ANGELES, CA 90068
TEL: (323) 850-1900 m 19 2023
FAX: (323) 850-1 943
BY '
fl! fi/M‘g’ a fifié’ .1
OOOQQUIhU-ib)
EggggfiHFfi’EgEr’g‘g’FF’ LAURA BRUCK, DEPT???
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
10
ELIZABETH HECTOR, AN INDIVIDUAL; CASE N0.: ClVD82012799
11
12
PLAINTIFF, vaLAINTIFF ELIZABETH HECTOR’S
13
14
WOTION IN LIMINE
v. NUMBER TWO TO EXCLUDE ANY
15
STERLING ESTATES, A BUSINESS ENTITY ATTORNEY REFERRAL
16
17 FORM UNKNOWN; ANZA MANAGEMENT
18 COMPANY, A CORPORATION; SCHOCHILL
19 C. CHAVEZ; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 50,
20 INCLUSIVE,
21
22 DEFENDANTS.
23
24
25 TO THE HONORABLE COURT, TO ALL PARTIES HEREIN AND TO THEIR
26 RESPECTIVE ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:
27
28 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE Plaintiff Elizabeth Hector will move t0 any attorney referral.
_ 1 _
__—_____—-—————-——
PLAINTIFFS‘ MOTION [N LIMINE No. 2 To EXCLUDE ATTORNEY COMMUNICATION
I. STATEMENT 0F FACTS
During an attomey-client conference, there were privileged communications regarding
doctors, medical, and treatment.
OOOQQUIhUJN—t
At plaintiff’s deposition, defense counsel asked:
1. Who referred you to Dr. X. I objected “Attorney-client privilege” and instructed my
client not to answer the question.
2. Defense counsel then asked “Who did you see first, the attorney or doctor?” I objected
“Attorney—client privilege” and instructed my client not to answer the question.
The privileged communication between attorney and client has never been disclosed.
II. GROUNDS FOR EXCLUSION
1. Attorney-client privilege protects any attorney referral to the doctor. (Evid Code 952)
2. Attorney referral t0 a doctor is a matter of statutory privilege, the exercise of which
cannot create an inference prejudicial to the plaintiff. (Evid Code 913 (b))
3. Referral to a doctor is irrelevant to any issues raised by the pleadings. (Evid Code 350)
4. Probative value is outweighed by prejudicial effect. (Evid Code 352)
5. Pursuant to California Business and Professions Code, an attorney has the highest duty
NNNNNNNNNi—r—t—p—Ir—HHHH—
to represent and act in the client’s best interest. (Quote the rule)
ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE PROTECTS ALL COMMUNICATIONS
OOQONUl-RWNF‘OKDOCQONthwNHO
III
BETWEEN AN ATTORNEY & CLIENT INCLUDING SELECTION OF A DOCTOR
Evidence Code 952 - Attorngy-client Qrivilege
During an attorney-client conference, there was a discussion 0f the medical issues—doctors.
The substance of said communications were confidential and privileged and have not been
disclosed to any third parties.
_ 2 -
______—._——-———————
PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION IN LIMINE No. 2 To EXCLUDE ATTORNEY COMMUNICATION
Document Filed Date
July 19, 2023
Case Filing Date
June 22, 2020
Category
Personal Injury Non-Motor Vehicle Unlimited
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
MARTINIAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. “’3 KAVEH KESHMIRI ESQ. BAR No. 285348 | F 7; L E: 2801 CAHUENGA BOULEVARD WEST Sggfifi 8235:; 32:3,“an SAN BERMARmNO Qumran LOS ANGELES, CA 90068 TEL: (323) 850-1900 m 19 2023 FAX: (323) 850-1 943 BY ' fl! fi/M‘g’ a fifié’ .1 OOOQQUIhU-ib) EggggfiHFfi’EgEr’g‘g’FF’ LAURA BRUCK, DEPT??? SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO 10 ELIZABETH HECTOR, AN INDIVIDUAL; CASE N0.: ClVD82012799 11 12 PLAINTIFF, vaLAINTIFF ELIZABETH HECTOR’S 13 14 WOTION IN LIMINE v. NUMBER TWO TO EXCLUDE ANY 15 STERLING ESTATES, A BUSINESS ENTITY ATTORNEY REFERRAL 16 17 FORM UNKNOWN; ANZA MANAGEMENT 18 COMPANY, A CORPORATION; SCHOCHILL 19 C. CHAVEZ; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 50, 20 INCLUSIVE, 21 22 DEFENDANTS. 23 24 25 TO THE HONORABLE COURT, TO ALL PARTIES HEREIN AND TO THEIR 26 RESPECTIVE ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: 27 28 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE Plaintiff Elizabeth Hector will move t0 any attorney referral. _ 1 _ __—_____—-—————-—— PLAINTIFFS‘ MOTION [N LIMINE No. 2 To EXCLUDE ATTORNEY COMMUNICATION I. STATEMENT 0F FACTS During an attomey-client conference, there were privileged communications regarding doctors, medical, and treatment. OOOQQUIhUJN—t At plaintiff’s deposition, defense counsel asked: 1. Who referred you to Dr. X. I objected “Attorney-client privilege” and instructed my client not to answer the question. 2. Defense counsel then asked “Who did you see first, the attorney or doctor?” I objected “Attorney—client privilege” and instructed my client not to answer the question. The privileged communication between attorney and client has never been disclosed. II. GROUNDS FOR EXCLUSION 1. Attorney-client privilege protects any attorney referral to the doctor. (Evid Code 952) 2. Attorney referral t0 a doctor is a matter of statutory privilege, the exercise of which cannot create an inference prejudicial to the plaintiff. (Evid Code 913 (b)) 3. Referral to a doctor is irrelevant to any issues raised by the pleadings. (Evid Code 350) 4. Probative value is outweighed by prejudicial effect. (Evid Code 352) 5. Pursuant to California Business and Professions Code, an attorney has the highest duty NNNNNNNNNi—r—t—p—Ir—HHHH— to represent and act in the client’s best interest. (Quote the rule) ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE PROTECTS ALL COMMUNICATIONS OOQONUl-RWNF‘OKDOCQONthwNHO III BETWEEN AN ATTORNEY & CLIENT INCLUDING SELECTION OF A DOCTOR Evidence Code 952 - Attorngy-client Qrivilege During an attorney-client conference, there was a discussion 0f the medical issues—doctors. The substance of said communications were confidential and privileged and have not been disclosed to any third parties. _ 2 - ______—._——-——————— PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION IN LIMINE No. 2 To EXCLUDE ATTORNEY COMMUNICATION