Armenta

Armenta v. Superior Court

Good Law
101 Cal. App. 4th 525·124 Cal. Rptr. 2d 273·2002 Cal. App. LEXIS 4532·2002 Daily Journal DAR 9676·2002 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7741
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 30, 2002B157775California3,464 words

Opinion

Opinion

Spencer, J.

Introduction

Qui tam plaintiff Nora Armenia and plaintiffs East Bay Municipal Utility District, City and County of San Francisco, and City of Santa Monica petition for a writ of mandate commanding the superior court to vacate its order of March 27, 2002 and enter a new and different order prohibiting most of that which the March 27 order permits real parties in interest James Jones Company, Mueller Co., Tyco International (US), Inc. and Watts Industries, Inc., to do. Petitioners contend that California law precludes real parties in interest from interviewing and retaining experts who are privy to Armenia’s confidential information. In addition, they contend, Armenia has a valid work product interest in Richard Preston Maas’s reports, an interest that Los Angeles Department of Water and Power’s counsel had no authority to waive. For the reasons stated post, we agree and grant the petition for a writ of mandate.

Factual and Procedural Background

On January 31, 2001, petitioner Nora Armenia (Armenia) filed a second amended complaint for violation of the California False Claims Act (Gov. Code, § 12650 et seq.). Armenia, a former employee of James Jones Company (Jones),…

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.