Cases of Interest

The Trial Court erred in allowing Plaintiff’s forensic accounting expert to present opinion that had not previously been disclosed.

Remote car rental company owed no duty to inquire as to whether a renter was intoxicated when he used the app to rent a vehicle.

Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division 2, California. October 23, 2024, modified November 21, 2024

There was no evidence of warning signs of theft or security problems. The Court of Appeal concluded that the special circumstances doctrine did not apply in this case. The court affirmed the summary judgment.

A court may not require a deponent to answer “legal contention” questions at his or her deposition, for example, to state all facts, list all witnesses, and identify all documents that support or pertain to a particular contention in the deponent’s pleadings. These questions, while entirely appropriate for written interrogatories, are not proper at a party’s deposition.