Legal Opinion

Duronslet v. Kamps

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 15, 2012No. A131496PublishedCited by 25 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

JONES, P. J.

The trial court issued an injunction pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 527.6 protecting Jill Duronslet and her immediate family from Joyce Kamps. On appeal, Kamps contends the injunction must be reversed because the only evidence that she made a “credible threat of violence” under section 527.6, former subdivision (a)1 was inadmissible multiple hearsay protected by the physician-patient privilege.

We affirm. We conclude Kamps forfeited her objections to certain hearsay evidence offered at the hearing on Duronslet’s injunction. We also conclude the trial court may…

2Cases cited35 opinions

  1. Tarasoff v. Regents of University of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
  2. People v. HillCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
  3. People v. WaidlaCalifornia Supreme Court · 2000
  4. People v. SamayoaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1997
  5. Vons Companies, Inc. v. Seabest Foods, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1996

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

3Cited by25 opinions

  1. Ragland v. U.S. Bank National Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
  2. Oiye v. FoxCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
  3. Davila v. Mejia (In re Davila), California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
  4. Snibbe v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2014
  5. A.H. v. H.N. CA1/3California Court of Appeal · 2021

20 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