California Courts of Appeal
Mar. 18, 2017
Summary judgment: no longer a disfavored remedy
A recent California Supreme Court decision might seem to be a simple opinion about the exclusion of undisclosed expert witnesses. But it may end up being cited more for what it says about summary judgment. By Josh McDaniel
Josh McDaniel
Associate
Horvitz & Levy LLP
Appellate Law
3601 W Olive Ave Fl 8
Burbank , CA 91505-4681
Phone: (818) 995-0800
Fax: (818) 995-3157
Email: jmcdaniel@horvitzlevy.com
UCLA Law School
Josh is an associate in the Los Angeles office of Horvitz & Levy LLP, a firm specializing in civil appeals. He helps to supervise Harvard Law School's Religious Freedom Clinic. The views expressed here are his own.
On first glance, the California Supreme Court's recent decision in Perry v. Bakewell Hawthorne, LLC, 2017 DJDAR 1597, might seem to be a simple opinion about the exclusion of undisclosed expert witnesses. But in fact, it may end up being cited more for what it says about summary judgment than for what it says about expert witness disclosure.
Before we get to the opinion in Perry, a brief review of summary j...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In