Kerner

Kerner v. Superior Court

Good Law
141 Cal. Rptr. 3d 504·206 Cal. App. 4th 84
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 26, 2012Nos. B233918, B235664; Nos. B234423, B236927California16,447 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Croskey, J.

Stockwell, Harris, Widom, Woolverton & Muehl, a California professional corporation (the Stockwell firm), and three of its members, George Woolverton, Steven Harris and Edward Muehl (collectively, Defendants), are defendants in an action brought by another member of the firm, Richard M. Widom. Widom’s complaint arises from the firm’s termination of his employment after Lisa Kerner, an attorney employed by the firm who was married to Widom at the time, accused him of domestic violence.

Kerner challenges orders compelling Defendants to produce documents purportedly protected by her attorney-client privilege and compelling her- to answer deposition questions purportedly invading her attorney-client privilege. Defendants challenge orders permitting discovery of their financial condition in connection with Widom’s claims for punitive damages (Civ. Code, § 3295, subd. (c)) and, based on collateral estoppel, granting a motion in limine to exclude any evidence of purported domestic violence.

After careful consideration of the record in these four consolidated writ proceedings, we conclude that (1) the trial court must conduct further proceedings to determine whether Kerner…

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.