Nguyen

Nguyen v. PROTON TECHNOLOGY CORP.

Good Law
1999 Cal. App. LEXIS 23·69 Cal. App. 4th 140·81 Cal. Rptr. 2d 392·99 Daily Journal DAR 427·14 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 1238
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 12, 1999A082058California4,714 words

Opinion

Opinion

Haerle, J.

I. Introduction

This appeal presents the interesting issue of the extent to which the absolute litigation privilege provided by Civil Code section 47, subdivision (b), protects statements made in pre-civil-litigation demand letters or telephone calls which reflect discredit on individuals and are substantially extraneous to the threatened litigation. In reversing the summary judgment granted by the trial court in favor of the respondents, we hold that reasonable limits should and do exist on the type and character of prelitigation statements which are protected by the privilege.

II. Factual And Procedural Background

Appellant was employed as sales representative of respondent Proton Technology Corporation (Proton) from approximately August 1995 until March 1996. Proton is a Fremont-based manufacturer of printed circuit boards. At least as of December 1995, appellant was employed by Proton through the Santa Clara County Probation Department’s work furlough program. The only communication in the record to Proton from that department does not recite any offense committed by appellant which brought him to that probationary status, but respondents’ appendix includes…

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.