For reprint rights or to purchase a copy of your Daily Journal photo, email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices or call 949-702-5390.

To buy more copies, call 866-531-1492 or email subscribe@dailyjournal.com
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...

Evidence,
Civil Litigation

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.

Already a subscriber?

Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)

Related Content

Evidence

Marriage of Lietz

Trial court properly sustained objection to questions seeking to elicit expert testimony on case-specific fact about which the expert lacked independent knowledge and had not been indepen...

Criminal Law and Procedure

People v. Sanchez

Case-specific statements related by prosecution's expert concerning defendant's gang membership is inadmissible hearsay, resulting in reversal of street gang enhancements.

Criminal Law and Procedure

People v. Ochoa

Defendant's conduct sufficient to establish 'pattern of criminal gang activity' to support gang enhancement despite gang expert's alleged use of inadmissible hearsay.

Conservatorship

Conservatorship of K.W.

In case involving appointment of conservatorship, permitting jury to consider case-specific hearsay testimony of psychiatrist violates ‘Sanchez,’ but reversal not warranted where error is...

Criminal Law and Procedure

People ex rel. Reisig v. Acuna

Preliminary gang injunction is properly granted where evidence of gang was presented based on expert’s observations and vast experiences with its members.



By using our website, you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy. You can learn more about how we use cookies by reviewing our Privacy Policy here.