Legal Opinion
Fox v. Kramer
California Supreme Court
Decided March 16, 2000No. S077861PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
MOSK, J.
In this matter we address the question whether plaintiffs in a malpractice action could subpoena the expert trial testimony of an investigator for the California Department of Health Services (hereafter DHS), or refer at trial to a draft preliminary report he prepared for the DHS, when the investigator had relied substantially on hospital peer review committee records in forming his opinions. The superior court granted a motion by the DHS to quash the subpoena; it also ruled that plaintiffs could not introduce or refer to the draft preliminary report summarizing his conclusions.
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Trammel v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- University of Pennsylvania v. Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- People v. GardeleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1996
- Roberts v. City of PalmdaleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993
- Arnett v. Dal CieloCalifornia Supreme Court · 1996
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- City of Bethel v. PetersAlaska Supreme Court · 2004
- J.B. Hunt Transport, Inc., and Terry L. Brown, Jr. v. The Guardianship of Kristen ZakIndiana Court of Appeals · 2016
- O'Meara v. Palomar-Pomerado Health SystemCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
- AHMED HASSAN VS. ROLAND WILLIAMS (L-0213-16, OCEAN COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2021
- AHMED HASSAN VS. ROLAND WILLIAMS (L-0213-16, OCEAN COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2021
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.