While there are some bright line rules for closing argument - the Golden Rule, offering personal opinions, referencing evidence not presented during trial - it is abundantly clear that a trial court must not restrict a lawyer's ability to interpret and argue the law. The latitude given to a lawyer in arguing the law is so "wide" as to be "unabridged." See Cassim v. Allstate Ins. Co. (2004) 33 Cal.4th 780, 795; see also Neumann v. Bishop (1976) 59 Cal. App. 3d 451, 4...
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