Personal Injury Lawyer Blog
It is worth noting that situations similar to those described in this medical malpractice case could just as easily occur at any of the healthcare facilities in the area, such as Kaiser Permanente, UC Davis Medical Center, Mercy, Methodist, or Sutter.
(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this personal injury lawsuit and its proceedings.)
REFERENCE TO OR EVIDENCE OF IAN HALL’S PERSONAL BANKRUPTCY IS IRRELEVANT TO THE INSTANT TRIAL AND UNTIMELY EVIDENCE
To be admissible, evidence must be relevant. (Ev. Code §350.) Relevant evidence means evidence [h]aving some tendency in reason to prove or disprove any disputed fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action. (Ev. Code §210.) Once it has been established that the plaintiff’s proposed evidence is not material and relevant to the issues at hand, it is mandatory that it be excluded as evidence. (People v. Thompson (1981) 127 Cal.App.3d 13, 18.)
Here, there is no relevance to the fact that Ian Hall filed for bankruptcy and had his bankruptcy discharged on August 11, 2008. He filed for Chapter 7 personal bankruptcy, and after his was determined a no-asset estate, it was discharged. Plaintiffs, who were listed as creditors, took the necessary steps to file a Motion for Relief from the Automatic Stay, and after being heard by the federal bankruptcy judge had their recovery for this lawsuit limited to Mr. Hall’s applicable insurance policies. Other co-defendants were also liste as creditors, but they either failed to file a Motion for Relief, withdrew their Motions before they were heard. (See Part 3 of 3.)
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.