Shaoxing City etc. Products v. Landsberg & Associates CA2/2

DISCUSSION

We independently review whether the trial court properly granted summary judgment due to the absence of any triable issue of material fact. (Code Civ. Proc., § 473c.) In doing so we liberally construe the evidence in support of the party opposing the motion, and resolve doubts against summary judgment and in favor of trial. (Ibid.; Mt. Hawley Insurance Company v. Lopez (2013) 215 Cal.App.4th 1385, 1393-1394.) Among other things, California’s mediation confidentiality statutes provide that “[n]o evidence of anything said or any admission made for the purpose of, in the course of, or pursuant to, a mediation . . . is admissible or subject to discovery . . . .” (§ 1119, subd. (a).) This prohibition reaches “[a]ll communications, negotiations or settlement discussions by and between participants in the course of a mediation . . .” (§ 1119, subd. (c)). Consistent with its purpose of “encourag[ing] mediation by permitting the parties to frankly exchange views[] without fear that disclosures might be used against them in later proceedings” (Fair v. Bakhtiari (2006) 40 Cal.4th 189, 194), the mediation

Plaintiffs separately appealed the order granting summary judgment…