Q: We have a dispute with a seller who has a lawyer demanding payment and threatening a prosecution. The seller sent me a hostile email, which is abusive and false, and copied it to our mutual client. I am told that it is “privileged” so I cannot make a complaint on this subject. Can you explain this?
SJ, Cerritos
A: In California, there is a privilege of litigation that protects communications from civil liability. These may include a variety of publications, from writings to verbal accusations. The privilege is stated in article 47b of the Civil Code and can, in fact, be absolute.
However, there are some exceptions to the privilege of dispute, such as a violation of certain laws of the collection of unfair and federal debt and criminal proceedings for perjury. In addition, keep in mind that for a communication to be privileged and therefore protected, it must be made to continue the objects of the dispute, and must also have a connection or a logical relationship with action.
Given the nuances here, consultation with a qualified lawyer is highly recommended. By the way, I know from personal experience on the remarks which were intended for me to link myself to a potential trial – and which were very offensive. I could not take measures, however, given the dispute privilege. Instead, we focused on the case in the possible case, as well as to show that the “bad” would be extremely stupid to continue his conduct.
Q: Our lawyer tells us that we can welcome a key witness in the case (which will testify for the other side). We believe that he should specify now so that the case can disappear, but our lawyer says that it is a better strategy to wait and deposit the witness at the trial. Thoughts?
SG, Belmont Shores
A: It is not a dilemma as unusual as you may think. I say “dilemma” because it is tempting to let the other party know that you can indeed remove their witness, and this can lead to the end of the case or obtain better regulations. On the other hand, you probably hired the lawyer because of his expertise. Thus, the decision lights up on who ends up managing the show. Conclusion: What decision is the most cautious – is it better to let them know what you have, or to jump at the right time?
Some “war stories” can be interesting: one of my colleagues has kept evidence of dismissal in its rear pocket, was judged, used it effectively and obtained a great verdict. There may be circumstances, however, when the court does not find a “real dismissal”, which means that the evidence may not be deemed eligible, or simply not to work as well as hope. In a case that I tried, testimony and evidence of the dismissal were admitted this afternoon; But the next morning, the judge changed his mind (excluding).
Therefore, an important question here: what are you looking to do in your case? The answer could have a significant impact on the fact that your lawyer may be convinced of “letting the cat come out of the bag” now, instead of sitting down and waiting to “make an ambush” at the opponent at the precipitous moment.
Your lawyer can ultimately do what you tell him to do. Speak carefully to determine if you can arrive on the same wavelength.
Ron Sokol has been an exercise lawyer for over 40 years and has also been on several occasions as a pro Tem judge, mediator and referee. It is important to keep in mind that this chronicle presents a summary of the law and must not be dealt with or considered as legal advice, not to mention a substitute for a real consultation with a qualified professional.
Originally published:
California Daily Newspapers
