No. 21-40

Lumbsden A. Sangster v. Anthony Valencia

Lower Court: California
Docketed: 2021-07-12
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response WaivedRelisted (2)
Tags: civil-procedure civil-rights defamation evidence evidence-tampering fair-report-privilege free-speech police-communication press-communication section-47
Key Terms:
Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference: 2021-12-03 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the fair report privilege applies to a private communication between a police officer and a member of the press in a defamation case

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED . (1) Whether the fair report privilege apply to a private ‘ communication between a police officer and a member of . ' the press is supported in a defamation cases. (2) Whether Section § 47 (a), is privilege even though ; physical evidence were planted/altered in furtherance qualified a defendant for this subdivision in a defamation case. (See Section § 47(b)(2)). ; (3) Does the California Evidence Code EVID § 250, apply to evidence of records marked as exhibits in a , complaint. : af , 7 ; PARTIES TO PROCEEDING BELOW — . . The

Docket Entries

2021-12-06
Rehearing DENIED.
2021-11-09
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/3/2021.
2021-10-19
2021-10-04
Petition DENIED.
2021-08-18
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/27/2021.
2021-08-10
Waiver of right of respondent Anthony Valencia to respond filed.
2021-07-01
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 11, 2021)

Attorneys

Anthony Valencia
Matthew John MarnellSan Bernardino County Counsel, Respondent
Matthew John MarnellSan Bernardino County Counsel, Respondent
Lumbsden A. Sangster
Lumbsden A. Sangster — Petitioner
Lumbsden A. Sangster — Petitioner