Gootee

Gootee v. Lightner

Good Law
1990 Cal. App. LEXIS 1388·224 Cal. App. 3d 587·274 Cal. Rptr. 697·90 Daily Journal DAR 11723
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 24, 1990D010257California3,229 words

Opinion

Opinion

Froehlich, J.

Appellant Michael Gootee (individually and as guardian ad litem for Janna and Lisa Gootee) appeals from the judgment entered in favor of respondents Marshall Lightner and The Family Alliance (respondents) following an order granting respondents’ motion for summary judgment based on the absolute privilege of Civil Code section 47, subdivision 2. Appellant’s complaint sought damages from respondents for professional malpractice based on alleged intentional and negligent conduct. The alleged malpractice occurred during the course of psychological testing and evaluation performed in connection with certain judicial proceedings. We agree that appellant’s claims are barred by the absolute privilege provided by Civil Code section 47(2), and therefore affirm the judgment.

1. Factual Background

The undisputed material facts upon which respondents’ summary judgment motion was granted are relatively simple. In mid-1985, Irene (appellant’s former wife) filed a petition for change of custody, seeking custody of her three minor children who were then residing with appellant. The parties stipulated, through their counsel, to undergo psychological testing and evaluation in the context…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.