Flynn

Flynn v. Superior Court of San Diego County

Good Law
1997 Cal. App. LEXIS 743·57 Cal. App. 4th 990·67 Cal. Rptr. 2d 491·97 Daily Journal DAR 12045·97 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7501
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 18, 1997D028771California1,967 words

Opinion

Opinion

Nares, J.

Business and Professions Code section 7539, subdivision (a) provides that with the exception of divulging certain information to a law enforcement officer or district attorney, a licensed private investigator shall not divulge information acquired during his or her investigation except as “required by law” or as directed by the investigator’s employer or client. Based on the section, private investigator Jona Bolling contends she cannot be required to disclose the name of her employer in response to deposition questions. We conclude that the identity of the private investigator’s employer does not fall within the scope of the statute and that the court erred in holding Bolling could not be required to answer the deposition questions.

Background

Petitioner Flynn, Sheridan & Tabb (FS&T), a law firm, disposes of its trash through a private service. The trash is placed in an enclosed bin located on fenced and secured premises. In September 1995, petitioner Michael Flynn, an FS&T partner, discovered a man removing two bags of law firm trash. The man loaded the bags in a van, later determined to be owned by real party in interest Peter Barranco, and attempted to hit Flynn as…

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.