Jazayeri

Jazayeri v. Mao

Good Law
174 Cal. App. 4th 301·2009 Cal. App. LEXIS 859·94 Cal. Rptr. 3d 198
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 27, 2009B195083California10,138 words

Opinion

Opinion

Maneela, J.

INTRODUCTION

In this action brought by appellants for breach of contract and fraud, the trial court excluded the bulk of appellants’ documentary evidence on grounds of lack of authentication and hearsay. Concluding that appellants had failed to meet their burden of proof, the court then entered judgment for respondents. We conclude that the blanket exclusion was error, and that much of the evidence offered was adequately authenticated and was not subject to any legitimate hearsay objection. As set forth in greater detail below, certain documents qualified for admission as official records under Evidence Code section 1280, others as business records under Evidence Code section 1271, and still others as admissions under Evidence Code section 1220 or adoptive admissions under Evidence Code section 1221.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

A. Claims Presented

Appellants Mahshid Jazayeri and her husband David Rashidian, doing business as R&A Ranch, brought suit against respondents Susan Mao, her sons Dennis and Eric Mao, and their company, Mao Foods, Inc. The complaint alleged that appellants were in the business of raising chickens for sale and that they and respondents…

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.