Jabro

Jabro v. Superior Court

Good Law
115 Cal. Rptr. 2d 843·2002 Cal. App. LEXIS 796·2002 Daily Journal DAR 1057·95 Cal. App. 4th 754·2002 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 873
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 28, 2002D038757California1,859 words

Opinion

Opinion

McINTYRE, J.

We hold here that before a trial court may enter an order allowing discovery of financial condition information under Civil Code section 3295, subdivision (c) (all statutory references are to the Civil Code unless otherwise specified), it must (1) weigh the evidence presented by both sides, and (2) make a finding that it is very likely the plaintiff will prevail on his claim for punitive damages.

Hikmat Jabro and Saad Matti have petitioned this court for a writ of mandate reversing an order entered pursuant to section 3295, subdivision (c) (section 3295(c)) allowing discovery of their financial condition. Jabro and Matti contend the superior court erred in allowing discovery because it considered only evidence in favor of discovery submitted by plaintiff and real party in interest, William Hill, and concluded that Hill needed only to present evidence of a prima facie case supporting a claim for punitive damages—that is, evidence sufficient to avoid summary judgment on the issue.

We issued an order to show cause and a temporary stay, and for the reasons set forth below, we issue a writ of mandate directing the trial court to vacate its order granting discovery of Jabro’s…

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.