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...

Litigation & Arbitration,
Evidence

Dec. 12, 2023

A party’s duty to preserve evidence arises when litigation is ‘reasonably anticipated’

The Victor Valley court began with well understood principles of how impactful evidence destruction could be on "fairness and justice." The court then teed up the primary issue by addressing when the duty to preserve evidence should arise as no discovery statute provided clear direction.

Andrew Owen

Panish, Shea, Boyle & Ravipudi LLP

11111 Santa Monica Blvd Ste 700
Los Angeles , CA 90025

Phone: (310) 477-1700

Email: owen@psblaw.com

Southwestern Univ SOL; Los Angeles CA

Evidence preservation is a critical issue for attorneys and their clients. Failing to preserve evidence can result in monetary, evidentiary, and issues sanctions, up to case-killing terminating sanctions with a judge’s order imposing such sanctions reviewed and reversed only for “manifest abuse exceeding the bounds of reason.” Sabetian v. Exxon Mobil Corp., 57 Cal.App.5th 1054, 1084 (2020); Tucker v. Pac. Bell Mobile...

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.)