holding that district court did not abuse its discretion by excluding testimony of defendant's former business partner regarding the partner's opinion of defendant's character for untruthfulness where district court judge determined that the testimony was not "useful to a jury"
Summary of this case from Hayko v. State90-56140.
January 28, 1993.
C.D.Cal.
AFFIRMED
holding that district court did not abuse its discretion by excluding testimony of defendant's former business partner regarding the partner's opinion of defendant's character for untruthfulness where district court judge determined that the testimony was not "useful to a jury"
Summary of this case from Hayko v. StateFull title:Bergen Brunswig Corp. v. Safety Mut. Cas. Corp
Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Date published: Jan 28, 1993
California's litigation privilege is "routinely applied in federal court." Anderson v. Gibson, Dunn, &…
Shavelson v. Haw. Civil Rights Comm'nHowever, since that determination is non-binding and non-final, and can be appealed in state court, seesupra…