California’s evidentiary rules have changed. As of January 1, 2024, defense expert testimony in medical causation cases is subject to a higher threshold.
Seth H. Victor
Seth Victor is an associate in the Litigation Department. His practice includes a range of commercial litigation matters, including product liability defense and contract disputes. Seth has represented clients at all stages of litigation, including drafting complaints and briefs, preparing for and taking depositions, drafting and responding to written discovery, preparing witnesses for trial, and obtaining favorable outcomes at trial. Most recently, he was a member of two trial teams that won complete defense verdicts on behalf of Monsanto in high-profile product liability matters.
Seth graduated from UCLA School of Law, where he was a Problem Developer for the Moot Court Honors Board and a Senior Editor for the Journal of Environmental Law and Policy. He also worked as a judicial extern for the Honorable John Z. Lee of the Northern District of Illinois.
Using Demonstrative Exhibits as Admissible Evidence Under California Law
During trial, lawyers make many strategic decisions to try to appeal to a jury. For example, they consider not only the substance of the evidence they present, but also the emotional impact of that evidence. But the impact of a witness’ testimony can be blunted if your jury is not following the testimony, so the use of demonstrative exhibits can be a useful tool to ensure the jury remains focused on the testimony.
How Different Judicial Notice Rules Can Change an Outcome
Judicial notice is one of the less glamorous parts of motion practice. A request for judicial notice is typically a lower-priority background document, drafted towards the end of the brief-writing process, along with a notice of motion and declaration. But at times, questions relating to judicial notice standards warrant additional consideration, along with the merits of the case.
Tolling Statutes of Limitations in Products Liability Cases: Latent Injury or Unknown Cause?
Consider a hypothetical person named Jane, who bought a chair twenty years ago. The chair was designed to help relieve back pain, but it actually made it worse. Because Jane was trying many different remedies, she did not associate the chair with the new pain. Additionally, the problems with the chair were not discovered for many years, when a newspaper reported that the company had known this was a possibility. However, Jane had stopped using the chair after just a couple months, when she underwent a medical procedure that relieved her pain. Jane wants to bring a products liability claim for personal injury and negligent design, but are her claims time-barred? The answer may depend on the state in which Jane brings the action.