Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.
248 Cal. App. 4th 1023 *; 204 Cal. Rptr. 3d 196 **; 2016 Cal. App. LEXIS 532 ***
CITY OF PETALUMA, Petitioner, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SONOMA COUNTY, Respondent; ANDREA WATERS, Real Party in Interest.
Subsequent History: [***1] The Publication Status of this Document has been Changed by the Court from Unpublished to Published June 30, 2016.
Review denied by City of Petaluma v. Superior Court, 2016 Cal. LEXIS 7811 (Cal., Sept. 14, 2016)
Prior History: Superior Court of Sonoma County County, No. SCV256309, Elliot Daum, Judge.
City of Petaluma v. Superior Court, 2016 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 4259 (Cal. App. 1st Dist., June 8, 2016)
attorney-client, work product doctrine, legal advice, privileged, legal services, avoidable consequences, waived, communications, confidential, investigate, harassment, discovery, factual investigation, outside counsel, disclosure, claim of privilege, trial court, work product protection, sexual harassment, asserting, retention, dominant purpose, work product, postemployment, retaliation, documents, expertise, advice
Civil Procedure, Discovery & Disclosure, Discovery, Appeals, Appellate Jurisdiction, Interlocutory Orders, Remedies, Writs, Standards of Review, De Novo Review, Questions of Fact & Law, Substantial Evidence, Discovery, Privileged Communications, Attorney-Client Privilege, Evidence, Burdens of Proof, Allocation, Privileges, Attorney-Client Privilege, Scope, Legal Ethics, Client Relations, Duties to Client, Duty of Confidentiality, Elements, Representation, Work Product Doctrine, Scope of Protection, Waiver, Waiver of Protections, Client Relations, Privileged Communications, Labor & Employment Law, Sexual Harassment, Defenses, Antiharassment Policy, Employer Liability, Harassment by Supervisors, Harassment, Hostile Work Environment