Evidence,
Litigation & Arbitration
Dec. 12, 2023
A party’s duty to preserve evidence arises when litigation is ‘reasonably anticipated’
The Victor Valley court began with well understood principles of how impactful evidence destruction could be on "fairness and justice." The court then teed up the primary issue by addressing when the duty to preserve evidence should arise as no discovery statute provided clear direction.
Andrew Owen
Panish, Shea, Boyle & Ravipudi LLP
11111 Santa Monica Blvd Ste 700
Los Angeles , CA 90025
Phone: (310) 477-1700
Email: owen@psblaw.com
Southwestern Univ SOL; Los Angeles CA
Evidence preservation is a critical issue for attorneys and their clients. Failing to preserve evidence can result in monetary, evidentiary, and issues sanctions, up to case-killing terminating sanctions with a judge’s order imposing such sanctions reviewed and reversed only for “manifest abuse exceeding the bounds of reason.” Sabetian v. Exxon Mobil Corp., 57 Cal.App.5th 1054, 1084 (2020); Tucker v. Pac. Bell Mobile...
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