California Trial Lawyers Journal, Volume 19California Trial Lawyers Association., 1981 - Law |
From inside the book
Results 1-3 of 29
Page 66
permitted under Rudnick v . Superior Court , 11 Cal . 3d 924 , 14 Cal . Rptr . 603 , ( 1961 ) . Otherwise medical records of other patients are protected by the physician / patient privilege . Marcus v . Superi- or Court , 18 Cal . App ...
permitted under Rudnick v . Superior Court , 11 Cal . 3d 924 , 14 Cal . Rptr . 603 , ( 1961 ) . Otherwise medical records of other patients are protected by the physician / patient privilege . Marcus v . Superi- or Court , 18 Cal . App ...
Page 103
... Superior Court to either review the determination of the magistrate at the preliminary hearing that sufficient ... Superior Court . It is certainly true that a defendant has the right to bring a de novo motion to suppress in Superior ...
... Superior Court to either review the determination of the magistrate at the preliminary hearing that sufficient ... Superior Court . It is certainly true that a defendant has the right to bring a de novo motion to suppress in Superior ...
Page 105
... Superior Court ( 1976 ) 58 Cal . App . 3d 406 , 130 Cal.Rptr . 238. ( The reader is cautioned , however , that in the foregoing situation , if defendant brings a de novo 1538.5 motion in Superior Court prior to a ruling on his Section ...
... Superior Court ( 1976 ) 58 Cal . App . 3d 406 , 130 Cal.Rptr . 238. ( The reader is cautioned , however , that in the foregoing situation , if defendant brings a de novo 1538.5 motion in Superior Court prior to a ruling on his Section ...
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