Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Toyota Motor Corp. v. Superior Court

California Court of Appeal

Decided July 27, 2011No. B225393Published

1Concurrence

KLEIN, P. J., Concurring.

I concur in the lead opinion and its holding that irrespective of Code of Civil Procedure section 2025.260,1 which authorizes a court to permit the deposition of a party or officer, director, managing agent or employee of a party at a location more distant than that permitted under section 2025.250, the superior court is precluded by section 1989 from ordering a nonresident to appear at a California deposition. But I have concurred in the court’s opinion because I agree the present discovery statutory scheme compels the conclusion reached in that opinion. I write…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Sibley v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
  2. In re Honda American Motor Co.District Court, D. Maryland · 1996
  3. Integral Development Corp. v. WeissenbachCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2002
  4. Work v. BierDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1985
  5. Custom Form Manufacturing, Inc. v. Omron Corp.District Court, N.D. Indiana · 2000

5 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