Author - Craig A. Roeb

1
Is a Non-Party’s Contact Information Private?
2
Courts of Appeal are Reining in Ambiguous Settlement Offers
3
New Rules for Objections
4
Arbitration Update: An Overview of Recent California Appellate Decisions
5
OSHA Inspections: What to Expect and How to Prepare
6
Trial Evidence Limitations Imposed on Request for Admission Denials

Is a Non-Party’s Contact Information Private?

When a class action litigant seeks to discover contact information for a third party—often with respect to potential class members—privacy considerations come into play.

By: Craig A. Roeb, Esq. and Lauren S. Kadish, Esq.
September 14, 2017

Link To Article

Wage and hour class action litigation frequently involves lengthy and expensive battles over the proper scope of pre-class certification discovery.  The extent of unnamed potential class members’ right to privacy is a constant debate between litigants.  Early in the case, a plaintiff will propound discovery requesting contact information, timesheets, payroll history, for every putative class member company-wide or state-wide, even though the named plaintiff has no evidence or knowledge of unlawful practices beyond the particular location where he or she works.  In an effort to protect its employees’ right to privacy, defendants will often object to these requests on the grounds that such discovery is burdensome and invades privacy rights of non-party employees.

Read More

Courts of Appeal are Reining in Ambiguous Settlement Offers

By: Craig A. Roeb and Heather M. Patrick
Published by the Daily Journal

California Code of Civil Procedure Section 998 establishes a procedure to shift costs if a party fails to accept a reasonable pre-trial settlement offer. The statute has generally been considered an effective tool to force parties’ hands to settle by encouraging resolution and avoiding needless litigation and trials.  Barba v. Perez, 166 Cal. App. 4th (2008).  However, recent case law demonstrates that they must be carefully planned and composed, or else risk judicial nullification.  Download Full Article

 

New Rules for Objections

By: Craig A. Roeb and Chelsea Zwart
Published in the Los Angeles Daily Journal – Download Article
February 22, 2016

Only two months in, 2016 has already experienced significant changes to the California’s statutory and common law. Not to be left out, objections have received their fair share of attention from the Legislature and courts as well. As objections are often required to preserve future rights, being well-versed in the current laws governing them is an imperative for all litigators. This presents a brief overview of recent developments on the topic.

Read More

Arbitration Update: An Overview of Recent California Appellate Decisions

A Primer on the Evolving Case Law Governing the Enforceability of Arbitration Clauses

By: Richard H. Glucksman, Craig A. Roeb and Grace A. Nguyen
Published in California Lawyer – Download Article
December 4, 2015

Arbitration is a common procedure for dispute resolution—specific clauses requiring arbitration frequently appear in both commercial and consumer contracts. Even so, lawyers continue to battle over when and how arbitration can be invoked. Those skirmishes have produced a flood of recent appellate decisions that has greatly transformed the availability and enforceability of arbitration.

Read More

OSHA Inspections: What to Expect and How to Prepare

By: Craig A. Roeb and Katherine J. Flores
October 11, 2015
Download Article

In 2014, 4,679 individuals were killed while working in the United States – an equivalent of 3.3 fatalities per 100,000 full-time workers and more than 13 deaths per day.1   Obviously, workplace safety is a major concern.  To ensure safe and healthful working conditions, in 2014, there were 36,163 federal the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”) inspections and 47,217 State Plan OSHA inspections.2

Read More

Trial Evidence Limitations Imposed on Request for Admission Denials

By: Craig A. Roeb and Grace A. Nguyen
Published in Verdict Magazine – Download Article
June 10, 2015

In a matter of first impression in California, an appellate court has concluded that a party to litigation cannot use another party’s denial of Request for Admissions as impeachment at trial. On January 13, 2015, in Gonsalves v. Li, 2015 WL164606, the First District Court of Appeal overturned a $1.2 million jury verdict after the plaintiff’s attorney repeatedly examined the defendant over his denials of admission requests that had been propounded in the case.

In Gonsalves, plaintiff, Kenneth Gonsalves, worked as a sales consultant at a BMW dealership.  He filed an action against Ran Li and Xiaoming Li after Ran Li lost control of a BMW that he was test-driving, with Gonsalves and Xiaoming Li as passengers. After Ran Li turned onto a freeway on-ramp, he lost control of the vehicle, causing it to spin into a guardrail.  Gonsalves sued Ran Li for motor vehicle negligence, and sued Ran’s father, Xiaoming Li, for negligent supervision.  Xiaoming was later dismissed from the action. 

Read More

© Copyright 2000-2016 Chapman, Glucksman, Dean & Roeb apc - All Rights Reserved