Legal Opinion

O'LASKEY v. Sortino

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 2, 1990No. B040928PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

VOGEL, J.

Plaintiff Phillip J. O’Laskey appeals from a judgment entered after defendant Mike Sortino’s motion for summary judgment was granted. O’Laskey contends the trial court erred by refusing to receive in evidence a transcript of a tape-recorded telephone conversation which, if admitted, would have created a triable issue of material fact concerning the timeliness of O’Laskey’s complaint. Alternatively, O’Laskey contends the trial court should have continued the hearing on the motion to allow him to obtain admissible evidence with which to create a triable issue. We reject both…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Continental Baking Co. v. KatzCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
  2. People v. SpencerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1963
  3. Stratton v. First National Life InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1989
  4. De Lancie v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1982
  5. Warden v. KahnCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1979

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

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. People v. OlguinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994
  2. Shulman v. Group W Productions, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1998
  3. Flanagan v. FlanaganCalifornia Supreme Court · 2002
  4. El Pueblo de Puerto Rico v. de León MartínezSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1993
  5. Beverly Deteresa v. American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. Anthony Radziwill, AKA Anthony RadziwellCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1997

19 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