This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
Subscribe to the Daily Journal for access to Daily Appellate Reports, Verdicts, Judicial Profiles and more...

Civil Litigation,
Evidence

Apr. 29, 2024

Experts, case-specific facts, and hearsay

In re Marriage of Lietz, a recent civil case, highlights the importance of understanding the application of People v. Sanchez, which can result in the exclusion of expert testimony.

Shutterstock

Last February the Court of Appeal published a decision, In re Marriage of Lietz, that at first glance might not inspire great excitement. The case concerned the size of a lot and its impact on valuation. However, within the folds of this seemingly mundane civil matter lies a valuable reminder for litigators: application of People v. Sanchez, 63 Cal. 4th 665 (2016) can result in exclusion of expert testimony. Wha...

To continue reading, please subscribe.
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 up for Daily Journal emails