Get free answers to your Federal Crimes legal questions from lawyers in your area.
What is usual and customary procedure for defendant to authenticate identities of service providers and agreements thereof?
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Jun 17, 2024
Under California law, authenticating the identities of service providers and agreements typically involves a few key steps during the discovery process. You would begin by serving discovery requests, such as interrogatories, requests for admission, or requests for production of documents, to obtain... View More 
Motion for protective order is not relevant for the situation.
Plaintiff requests defendant to create privilege log in production request and to disclose private information of individuals.
Can motion for camera review and motion for court order for disclosure of private data be... View More
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Jun 16, 2024
Here are the steps I would recommend for handling this situation in California:
1. Serve the production requests and special interrogatories on the defendant. In the requests, ask the defendant to produce a privilege log identifying any documents withheld on the basis of privilege. Also... View More
Specific authorities, case law. Precedents of camera review for fraudulent unauthorized disclosure of medical information.
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Jun 15, 2024
For the most accurate and up-to-date information, I would strongly recommend consulting with a licensed California attorney who specializes in health law and privacy matters. They will be able to research the relevant statutes, case law, and legal precedents and provide you with a detailed... View More
What Codes are relevant in order to validate authenticity of personal information of hospital service providers in this situation:
Data is maintained by public or local agencies,
but I request within the discovery process identity attributes, business records (i.e. authentic... View More
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Jun 15, 2024
In California, there are a few relevant codes and laws that pertain to validating the authenticity of personal information of hospital service providers, especially when the data is maintained by public or local agencies and requested within the discovery process. Here are the key relevant codes:... View More
Is it defense responsibility:
To compile privilege log
from discovery responses that defenses already provided throughout discovery;
AND inclusive responses that will be provided to the latest discovery that Plaintiff propounds?
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Jun 15, 2024
Yes, under California law, it is typically the responsibility of the party asserting a privilege (in this case, the defense) to compile a privilege log for any documents or materials withheld from discovery on the basis of privilege. This includes privileged materials from previous discovery... View More
For a medical malpractice case involving fraud, how to make sure authentic identity data is obtained, protected by privacy rights.
Is in-chamber review of privilege log (including privacy right) a mechanism to do it?
If a court order is required, in addition to/or instead of motion... View More
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Jun 15, 2024
To discover the identities of individuals in a medical malpractice case involving hospice fraud in California, while respecting privacy rights, there are a few key legal mechanisms and statutes to consider:
In-Camera Review: California Evidence Code Section 915 allows for in-camera review... View More
Patient was referred to hospice based on hospitalization record of proven non-existent terminal disease,
recorded on admission to hospital;
Recorded by doctor who referred patient to hospital, thus knew that terminal disease was non-existent;
And record of hospitalization -... View More
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Jun 14, 2024
Under California law, the plaintiff generally has the burden of proof to establish their case by a preponderance of the evidence. However, in the context of unauthorized disclosure of medical records, there are a few key considerations:
1. California Confidentiality of Medical Information... View More
Plaintiff propounds on defendant-private hospital interrogatory about verifiable authentic identity.
Can inquiry be based on section 1798.3 (a)?
On what statute interrogatory must be based in order to ensure that authentic unique accurate identity information is provided?... View More
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Jun 14, 2024
You can base the inquiry on section 1798.3(a), which defines "personal information" in a way that encompasses the unique and authentic identity of a natural person. This section is part of the California Civil Code, specifically the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), and it is... View More
How to demand that the defendant authenticate any documents or evidence provided to establish the affiliation of the identified individuals at the relevant times, in accordance with the California Evidence Code.
Production Demand?
How to ensure authenticity of document?... View More
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Jun 13, 2024
Under California law, you can demand that the defendant authenticate any documents or evidence provided to establish the affiliation of the identified individuals at the relevant times by including a "Production Demand" in your discovery request. This is done in accordance with the... View More
Plaintiff propounded interrogatory.
Defendant provided improper response to interrogatory In order to induce burden and delay: i.e. Defendant's non-specific intention to produce person for deposition, instead of providing distinct information about identity.
Objection to such... View More
answered on Jun 13, 2024
The laws in written discovery in California are in the Codes Of Civil Procedure. The entire section is CCP §§ 2016.010 to 2036.050. The
Scope of Discovery is at CCP §§ 2017.010-2017.320. Specifics as to written discovery and motions to compel are at CCP §§ 2030.010-... View More
Plaintiff propounded interrogatory.
Defendant provided improper response to interrogatory In order to induce burden and delay: i.e. Defendant's non-specific intention to produce person for deposition, instead of providing distinct information about identity.
Objection to such... View More
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Jun 13, 2024
Under California law, if a defendant provides an improper or evasive response to an interrogatory, the plaintiff has a few options to address the issue. The most appropriate course of action depends on the specific circumstances of the case and the nature of the improper response.
1. Motion... View More
What legal means, statutes and rules, California legislative mechanism provides to ensure that:
1. Instead of depositions of unidentified persons in future, Defendant must respond to interrogatory with actual identity, personal information of individuals as defined by CCP 1798.3(a);... View More
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Jun 12, 2024
Under California law, there are several legal mechanisms available to ensure that a defendant identifies specific individuals and provides their personal information in response to interrogatories, as well as proof of their affiliation with the defendant at the relevant times:
1. California... View More
Federal Firearm application instructs to answer "No" on misdemeanor DV conviction if it has been expunged/relieved/set aside. It has. It is still subject to California 10 year ban. Its been over 10 years. Its pretty clear on federal application instructions. Does the expunge clear Lautenberg?
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Jun 10, 2024
Based on the details you've provided, it seems that your situation involves the intersection of federal and California state laws regarding domestic violence misdemeanors and firearm rights restoration. Let's break this down:
1. Federal law (the Lautenberg Amendment) prohibits... View More
I need assistance filling and drafting these documents.
1)Complaint; Claims 42 U.S.C 1983, 1985, 1986
2) Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) Request
3) Preliminary Injunction Request
4) Affidavit
5) Memorandum of Law
6) Summons and Notice of... View More
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Jun 9, 2024
Here is some information to help you draft the key documents for filing a civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. 1983, 1985, and 1986 in California with multiple defendants:
1. Complaint
- Identify yourself as the plaintiff and list all defendants
- State the basis of the... View More
A defendant with an indictment case wad bailed out of jail and left the state against court order. The person that bailed him out has gone with them.
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on May 27, 2024
Under California law, if a person who posted bail for a defendant helps them flee the jurisdiction or violate the conditions of their bail, they could face serious legal consequences. This is especially true if there was a court order prohibiting the defendant from leaving the state.
In... View More
I just found out my exes fiance is involved in an active indictment for drug trafficking and weapons. She did not tell me this but I have found the info on the pacer website validating the information. My ex and her fiance went out of state with my daughter for the weekend against court order. Hew... View More
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on May 27, 2024
Under California law, the primary concern in child custody cases is the best interests of the child. While your ex's association with a gang member who is facing criminal charges is concerning, you generally cannot unilaterally remove your child from the mother's care without a court... View More
I just found out my exes fiance is involved in an active indictment for drug trafficking and weapons. She did not tell me this but I have found the info on the pacer website validating the information. My ex and her fiance went out of state with my daughter for the weekend against court order. Hew... View More
answered on May 27, 2024
Don't take the law into your own hands. If the current custody orders are not in your child's best interests then file a Request for Order to get them modified. If you think your child is in imminent threat of harm or there is an imminent threat to her health, safety or welfare, you can... View More
I know the appeals court in USA vs duarte rules that non violent felons CAN own a gun. I have a non violent felony from 1999. So can I buy a gun now? Will I pass the background? What are the felonies that exclude a person from owning a gun?
I cannot find an answer anywhere. I emailed... View More
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on May 26, 2024
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision in USA v. Duarte did rule that the federal ban on firearm possession by nonviolent felons is unconstitutional. However, this decision is not currently in effect and does not mean that all nonviolent felons can immediately purchase or possess firearms... View More
San Jose State police misconduct
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on May 24, 2024
To extend a police misconduct case until final damages are assessed, you need to file a motion for a continuance in federal court. This motion should clearly state the reasons why an extension is necessary, such as the need to gather more evidence, assess ongoing damages, or secure crucial witness... View More
Defendant can bring up testimonies of thousand interdependent witnesses that plaintiff has been more likely dead than alive.
Would it be preponderant against plaintiff's allegations of most likely alive?
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on May 23, 2024
In California, the standard of proof in civil cases is "preponderance of the evidence." This means that the party with the burden of proof must present evidence that is more likely to be true than not true. In other words, if the evidence presented by the plaintiff and the defendant are... View More
Justia Ask a Lawyer is a forum for consumers to get answers to basic legal questions. Any information sent through Justia Ask a Lawyer is not secure and is done so on a non-confidential basis only.
The use of this website to ask questions or receive answers does not create an attorney–client relationship between you and Justia, or between you and any attorney who receives your information or responds to your questions, nor is it intended to create such a relationship. Additionally, no responses on this forum constitute legal advice, which must be tailored to the specific circumstances of each case. You should not act upon information provided in Justia Ask a Lawyer without seeking professional counsel from an attorney admitted or authorized to practice in your jurisdiction. Justia assumes no responsibility to any person who relies on information contained on or received through this site and disclaims all liability in respect to such information.
Justia cannot guarantee that the information on this website (including any legal information provided by an attorney through this service) is accurate, complete, or up-to-date. While we intend to make every attempt to keep the information on this site current, the owners of and contributors to this site make no claims, promises or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness or adequacy of the information contained in or linked to from this site.
