Fuller

Fuller v. Superior Court

Good Law
104 Cal. Rptr. 2d 525·2001 Cal. App. LEXIS 132·2001 Daily Journal DAR 2033·87 Cal. App. 4th 299·2001 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1644
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 27, 2001B144094California4,028 words

Opinion

Opinion

Aldrich, J.

Introduction

Petitioners, African-American shoppers who claim they were beaten by security guards, sued the individual guards, the guards’ employer IPC International Corporation (IPC), and others, alleging various tort causes of action. Petitioners noticed the depositions of the individual guard defendants. Fearing criminal prosecution arising from the same incident, the security guards moved the trial court for a protective order precluding the depositions, or staying them until the criminal statute of limitations expires. Petitioners opposed the motion and asked the trial court by a mandamus petition to prohibit the security guards from testifying at trial to matters about which they might, during deposition, invoke their privilege against self-incrimination (U.S. Const., 5th Amend.; Cal. Const., art. I, § 15 ). The trial court denied both the security guards’ motion and petitioners’ petition. Petitioners then sought a writ of mandate in this court to direct the trial court to preclude the security guards from testifying at trial to matters about which the security guards might during deposition invoke their privilege.

We hold that the trial court did not abuse its…

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.