Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)

Citation: Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
Parent Document: Fernandes v. Singh, 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 (2017)
Jurisdiction: California (state)
Effective Date: 2017-10-05
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/6239155/fernandes-v-singh/ ↗

Full Text

742 chars

Pointing to a general rule regarding punitive damages, that it is a plaintiff's burden to prove a defendant's financial condition (see Adams v. Murakami (1991) 54 Cal.3d 105, 108-109, 284 Cal.Rptr. 318, 813 P.2d 1348 ), Rawat faults the evidence of her financial condition because *759Fernandes's declaration about the "sale value" of the real property-which was unrebutted-was insufficient. This argument overlooks the trial court's discovery order compelling Rawat, the Trust, and Singh, to produce evidence of their financial condition-an order disregarded by each defendant. A defendant is in the best position to know his or her financial condition, and cannot avoid a punitive damage award by failing to cooperate with discovery orders.

Other Sections in This Document (61)

Full Text