Cassel

Cassel v. Superior Court

Good Law
119 Cal. Rptr. 3d 437·2011 Cal. LEXIS 2·51 Cal. 4th 113·244 P.3d 1080
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJanuary 13, 2011S178914California10,551 words

Opinion

Opinion

Baxter, J.

In order to encourage the candor necessary to a successful mediation, the Legislature has broadly provided for the confidentiality of things spoken or written in connection with a mediation proceeding. With specified statutory exceptions, neither “evidence of anything said,” nor any “writing,” is discoverable or admissible “in any arbitration, administrative adjudication, civil action, or other noncriminal proceeding in which . . . testimony can be compelled to be given,” if the statement was made, or the writing was prepared, “for the purpose of, in the course of, or pursuant to, a mediation . . . .” (Evid. Code, § 1119, subds. (a), (b).) “All communications, negotiations, or settlement discussions by and between participants in the course of a mediation . . . shall remain confidential.” (Id., subd. (c).) We have repeatedly said that these confidentiality provisions are clear and absolute. Except in rare circumstances, they must be strictly applied and do not permit judicially crafted exceptions or limitations, even where competing public policies may be affected. (Simmons v. Ghaderi (2008) 44 Cal.4th 570, 580 [ 80 Cal.Rptr.3d 83 , 187 R3d 934] (Simmons); Fair v.…

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.