Legal Opinion

Martinez v. Department of Transportation

California Court of Appeal

Decided July 7, 2015No. G048375, G048678PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

BEDSWORTH, Acting P. J.

I. INTRODUCTION

This is a case of egregious attorney misconduct. That word—egregious-—is difficult to write, but nothing else seems adequate. Blessed with a trial judge who allowed it, trial counsel ran roughshod over opposing counsel and the rules of evidence. We have no choice but to reverse.

Generally, what happened is this: Defendant’s attorney, Karen Bilotti, would ask a question in clear violation of the trial court’s in limine orders. The question would usually have the effect of gratuitously besmirching the character of plaintiff Donn Martinez. An objection…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Bloom v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  2. Las Palmas Associates v. Las Palmas Center AssociatesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1991
  3. City of Los Angeles v. DeckerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977
  4. Sabella v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1969
  5. Hoffman v. BrandtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1966

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Bigler-Engler v. Breg, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2017
  2. Bigler-Engler v. Breg, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2016
  3. Bigler-Engler v. Breg, Inc., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2016
  4. Pilliod v. Monsanto Co.California Court of Appeal · 2021
  5. Plascencia v. DeeseCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2021

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API