On-Demand   On-Demand Web Programs

California Trial Evidence 2013

Released on: Nov. 4, 2013
Running Time: 06:01:55

Running Time Segment Title Faculty Format
[01:01:46] Handling Objections at Depositions and Trials Honorable James Ware ~ Mediator, Arbitrator, and Special Master, JAMS
Martin P Moroski ~ Adamski Moroski Madden Cumberland & Green LLP
On-Demand MP3 MP4
[01:00:10] Effectively Using Demonstrative Evidence Thomas B. Mayhew ~ Farella Braun + Martel LLP
Shannon M Nessier ~ Hanson Bridgett LLP
On-Demand MP3 MP4
[01:00:20] Evidence in a Facebook World: Social Media and Electronic Documents Ivo Labar ~ Kerr & Wagstaffe LLP
Honorable Stephen D. Kaus ~ Judge, Superior Court of California, County of Alameda
On-Demand MP3 MP4
[00:58:25] Overcoming Obstacles to Admissibility Honorable Jacqueline Scott Corley ~ Magistrate Judge, United States District Court, Northern District of California
Robin G. Workman ~ Workman Law Firm, PC
On-Demand MP3 MP4
[00:59:15] Evidence as Part of Motion Practice James M. Wagstaffe ~ Kerr & Wagstaffe LLP
Thomas R. Burke ~ Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
On-Demand MP3 MP4
[00:50:55] Judicial Arbitration, Settlement and Evidence James M. Wagstaffe ~ Kerr & Wagstaffe LLP
Honorable David A. Garcia ~ Mediator, Arbitrator, and Special Master, JAMS
On-Demand MP3 MP4

Mastering the complexities of California evidence often can be the difference between winning and losing at trial.  Recent case law and statutory developments in the law of evidence render this mastery critical in modern litigation and trials.  This program is designed to give you the most up-to-date information on California evidence standards.  The panelists represent top-flight trial attorneys and judges who will provide winning strategies for your practices.

Lecture Topics  [Total time 06:01:55]

Segments with an asterisk (*) are available only with the purchase of the entire program.

  • Program Overview and Introductions* [00:11:04]
    James M Wagstaffe
  • Handling Objections at Depositions and Trials [01:01:46]
    Honorable James Ware, Martin P Moroski
  • Effectively Using Demonstrative Evidence [01:00:10]
    Thomas B Mayhew, Shannon M Nessier
  • Evidence in a Facebook World: Social Media and Electronic Documents [01:00:20]
    Honorable Stephen D. Kaus, Ivo Labar
  • Overcoming Obstacles to Admissibility [00:58:25]
    Honorable Jacqueline Scott Corley, Robin G Workman
  • Evidence as Part of Motion Practice [00:59:15]
    Thomas R. Burke, James M Wagstaffe
  • Judicial Arbitration, Settlement and Evidence [00:50:55]
    James M Wagstaffe, Honorable David A. Garcia

The purchase price of this Web Program includes the following articles from the Course Handbook available online:

  • Handling Objections at Deposition and Trial Outline
    Martin P. Moroski
  • Examples of Objections to the Form of the Question
    Honorable James Ware
  • Evidence Issue Chart
    Honorable James Ware
  • Demonstrative Evidence: Getting it Ready and Admitted
    Shannon M Nessier, Thomas B. Mayhew
  • Demonstrative Evidence: Best Practices
    Shannon M. Nessier, Thomas B. Mayhew
  • Evidence in a Facebook World: Social Media and Electronic Documents Outline
    Honorable Stephen D. Kaus, Ivo Labar
  • Authentication and Admissibility of Electronic Evidence
    Honorable James Ware
  • Evidence Authentication in a Virtual World (PowerPoint)
    Honorable Stephen D. Kaus, Ivo Labar
  • Overcoming Obstacles to Admissibility Outline
    Hon. Jacqueline Scott Corley, Robin G. Workman
  • Evidence in the Courtroom
    Hon. Jacqueline Scott Corley, Robin G. Workman
  • Exhibits
    Hon. Jacqueline Scott Corley, Robin G. Workman
  • Robin Orr v. Bank of America, NT & SA, 285 F.3d 764, United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit (2002)
    Hon. Jacqueline Scott Corley, Robin G. Workman
  • Additional References
    Hon. Jacqueline Scott Corley, Robin G. Workman
  • Anti-Slapp Litigation, Excerpts Include Chapter 5, Sections 5:1–5:35
    Thomas R. Burke
  • California Practice Guide: Civil Procedure Before Trial, Excerpts Include Chapter 10, Pages 10-46–10-88
    Thomas R. Burke
  • California Practice Guide: Alternative Dispute Resolution, Excerpts Include Chapter 3, Sections 3:93.6–3:181
    James M. Wagstaffe, Richard Chernick
  • California Practice Guide: Alternative Dispute Resolution, Excerpts Include Chapter 5, Sections 5:390.5c–5:393.15
    James M. Wagstaffe, Richard Chernick

Presentation Material

  • Electronic Evidence: The Benefits of Graphics in 21th Century Trials (PowerPoint Slides)
    Honorable James Ware
  • Demonstrative Evidence (PowerPoint Slides)
    Thomas B. Mayhew
  • Evidence Authentication in a Virtual World (PowerPoint Slides)
    Honorable Stephen D. Kaus, Ivo Labar
  • Overcoming Obstacles to Admissibility: A Federal Judge's Perspective (PowerPoint Slides)
    Honorable Jacqueline Scott Corley
Chairperson(s)
James M. Wagstaffe ~ Kerr & Wagstaffe LLP
Speaker(s)
Thomas R. Burke ~ Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
Honorable Jacqueline Scott Corley ~ Magistrate Judge, United States District Court, Northern District of California
Honorable David A. Garcia ~ Mediator, Arbitrator, and Special Master, JAMS
Honorable Stephen D. Kaus ~ Judge, Superior Court of California, County of Alameda
Ivo Labar ~ Kerr & Wagstaffe LLP
Thomas B. Mayhew ~ Farella Braun + Martel LLP
Martin P Moroski ~ Adamski Moroski Madden Cumberland & Green LLP
Shannon M Nessier ~ Hanson Bridgett LLP
Honorable James Ware ~ Mediator, Arbitrator, and Special Master, JAMS
Robin G. Workman ~ Workman Law Firm, PC

PLI makes every effort to accredit its On-Demand Web Programs and Segments.  Please check the Credit Information box to the right of each product description for credit information specific to your state.


On-Demand Web Programs and Segments
 are approved in:

Alabama1, Alaska, California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho*, Illinois , Iowa2*, Kansas, Kentucky*, Louisiana, Maine*, Mississippi, Missouri3, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire4, New Jersey, New Mexico5, New York6,  North Carolina7, North Dakota, Ohio8, Oklahoma9, Oregon*, Pennsylvania10, Rhode Island11, South Carolina, Tennessee12, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia13, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin14 and Wyoming*.

Iowa, Mississippi, Oklahoma, and Wisconsin DO NOT approve Audio Only On-Demand Web Programs.


Please Note: The State Bar of Arizona does not approve or accredit CLE activities for the Mandatory Continuing Legal Education requirement. PLI programs may qualify for credit based on the requirements outlined in the MCLE Regulations and Ariz. R. Sup. Ct. Rule 45.

*PLI will apply for credit upon request. Louisiana and New Hampshire: PLI will apply for credit upon request for audio-only on-demand web programs.


1Alabama: Approval of all web based programs is limited to a maximum of 6.0 credits.

 

2Iowa:  The approval is for one year from recorded date. Does not approve of Audio-only On-Demand Webcasts.

3Missouri:  On-demand web programs are restricted to six hours of self-study credit per year.  Self-study may not be used to satisfy the ethics requirements.  Self-study can not be used for carryover credit.

 

4New Hamphsire:  The approval is for three years from recorded date.

5New Mexico:  On-Demand web programs are restricted to 4.0 self-study credits per year. 


6New York:  Newly admitted attorneys may not take non-traditional course formats such as on-demand Web Programs or live Webcasts for CLE credit. Newly admitted attorneys not practicing law in the United States, however, may earn 12 transitional credits in non-traditional formats. 

7North Carolina:  A maximum of 4 credits per reporting period may be earned by participating in on-demand web programs. 


8Ohio:  To confirm that the web program has been approved, please refer to the list of Ohio’s Approved Self Study Activities at http://www.sconet.state.oh.us.  Online programs are considered self-study.  Ohio attorneys have a 6 credit self-study limit per compliance period.  The Ohio CLE Board states that attorneys must have a 100% success rate in clicking on timestamps to receive ANY CLE credit for an online program.

9Oklahoma:  Up to 6 credits may be earned each year through computer-based or technology-based legal education programs.


10Pennsylvania:  PA attorneys may only receive a maximum of four (4) hours of distance learning credit per compliance period. All distance learning programs must be a minimum of 1 full hour.
 

11Rhode Island:  Audio Only On-Demand Web Programs are not approved for credit.  On-Demand Web Programs must have an audio and video component.

12Tennessee:  The approval is for the calendar year in which the live program was presented.

13Virginia: All distance learning courses are to be done in an educational setting, free from distractions.

14Wisconsin: Ethics credit is not allowed.  The ethics portion of the program will be approved for general credit.  There is a 10 credit limit for on-demand web programs during every 2-year reporting period.  Does not approve of Audio-only On-Demand Webcasts.


Running time and CLE credit hours are not necessarily the same. Please be aware that many states do not permit credit for luncheon and keynote speakers.


If you have already received credit for attending some or the entire program, please be aware that state administrators do not permit you to accrue additional credit for repeat viewing even if an additional credit certificate is subsequently issued.


Note that some states limit the number of credit hours attorneys may claim for online CLE activities, and state rules vary with regard to whether online CLE activities qualify for participatory or self-study credits. For more information, call Customer Service (800) 260-4PLI (4754) or e-mail info@pli.edu.

 
Print Share Email