|
P1436 REVIEW DENIED A declarant's insistence on remaining anonymous indicates he did not expect to be inculpated by his statement, making it unreliable and not admissible as an admission against penal interest; a statement that could be against penal interest, but in which the declarant seemed to be trying to exculpate himself, was also unreliable and not admissible as an admission against penal interest; evidence that a defendant contaminated ground other than that involved in plaintiff's ground contamination suit, if offered to show that defendant was customarily careless about disposing of toxic chemicals, is made inadmissible by Evidence Code section 1101 because it was intended to establish that defendant's bad conduct in one circumstance shows a propensity to act badly in others; a trial court lacks authority to award sanctions for attorney misconduct that leads to a mistrial.CitationCLARK v OPTICAL COATING LAB (Contaminated Wells) 165 CA4 150 [See: EvC 1230, 1101, 1105; CCP 998, 1038, 128.7; Bauguess v Paine 22 C3 626; Olmstead v Gallagher 32 C4 804, P/AT 5/04]
|
|
