California Trial Lawyers Journal, Volume 19California Trial Lawyers Association., 1981 - Law |
From inside the book
Results 1-3 of 34
Page 103
... PROCEDURE SECTION 337.15 By JOSEPH E. DWORAK , Esq . San Jose A. RECAP OF C.C.P §337.15 AND SOME OF ITS INHERENT PROBLEMS . The California legislature enacted California Code of Civil Procedure Section 337.15 ( hereinafter C.C.P. ...
... PROCEDURE SECTION 337.15 By JOSEPH E. DWORAK , Esq . San Jose A. RECAP OF C.C.P §337.15 AND SOME OF ITS INHERENT PROBLEMS . The California legislature enacted California Code of Civil Procedure Section 337.15 ( hereinafter C.C.P. ...
Page 105
... Procedure section 337.15 is triggered by substantial completion of construction rather than the accrual of the cause of action , an action for indemnity would be barred unless brought within the 10 - year period asserted in a cross ...
... Procedure section 337.15 is triggered by substantial completion of construction rather than the accrual of the cause of action , an action for indemnity would be barred unless brought within the 10 - year period asserted in a cross ...
Page 110
... Procedure in light of the foregoing California decisions.17 With this consideration in mind , the only interpretation to which California Code of Civil Procedure section 337.15 is ready suscep- table to is the following ...
... Procedure in light of the foregoing California decisions.17 With this consideration in mind , the only interpretation to which California Code of Civil Procedure section 337.15 is ready suscep- table to is the following ...
Contents
Arne Werchick Esq San Francisco | 9 |
Is the Danger Excessive | 33 |
The Trial of a Medical Malpractice Case | 63 |
5 other sections not shown
Other editions - View all
Common terms and phrases
accident attorney award Barker barred benefit plan breast cancer Cal.Rptr California Supreme Court cause Civil Procedure claims Code of Civil compensation consumer cost counsel CTLA curling iron defendant defendant's deposition design defect determine developer doctor employee ERISA established evaluation Evidence Code expert witness filed foreseeable future damages Hahn hazards hospital hypothetical question indemnity action independent contractor injured worker instructions involved issue judgment jurors jury Labor Code Section legislative Liptak litigation lump manufacturer medical expert medical malpractice medical records motion negligence opinion pain party patient periodic payments physician plaintiff premises presented prior Products Liability reasonable res ipsa result risk Rptr rule safety engineering San Francisco special employer special employment standard statute of limitations statute of repose strict liability subcontractor substantially completed Superior Court supra testify testimony tion tort trial court Trial Lawyers trier of fact utilized verdict victim voir dire Warning