Chapter 3Other Evidence Affected or Excluded by Extrinsic Policies
Section § 1150
This law explains what evidence can and can't be considered when questioning if a jury's verdict is valid. It allows evidence about what was said, done, or happened inside or outside the jury room that might have improperly influenced the verdict. However, it prohibits evidence that looks into how this affected a juror's decision-making or mental processes. It also clarifies that nothing in this section changes the rules about a juror's ability to testify regarding impeaching or supporting a verdict.
Section § 1151
This law says that if a person or company takes steps to fix something after an accident or event happens, you can't use that fact in court to argue that they were negligent or at fault for the accident. In simple terms, fixing something after the fact doesn't automatically mean they were guilty of causing the issue.
Section § 1152
This law explains that if someone offers or promises money or services to settle a claim, that offer cannot be used as evidence to prove they are at fault for any loss or damage. However, if such evidence is allowed in a case about bad faith dealings or specific insurance code violations, then related offers can also be used for the same purpose. Offers to settle cannot be used in new trials, appeals, or proceedings about adjusting compensation unless it's a case for bad faith or insurance violations. The law doesn’t affect evidence showing partial claim satisfaction or a debtor's payment as proof of claim validity or new debt duties.
Section § 1153
If someone in a criminal case makes a guilty plea or offers to plead guilty but later changes their mind, this cannot be used as evidence against them in court or any other legal proceedings, including those before government bodies or panels.
Section § 1153.5
This law states that if someone makes an offer to settle a criminal case through civil means, or if they admit to something while making or negotiating that offer, that information can't be used as evidence in any court action. The idea is to encourage settlements without the fear of those discussions being used against someone later in court.
Section § 1154
This law prevents any evidence showing that someone has accepted, offered, or promised money or anything else of value to resolve a claim from being used in court to argue that the claim is not valid.
Section § 1155
This law states that if someone is insured for damages when harm occurred to someone else, that insurance information cannot be used in court to prove that the insured person was negligent or did something wrong.
Section § 1156
Hospitals in California can have committees that do research to lower illness and death rates. These committees can gather information and make suggestions. Generally, the notes and records from these research efforts can't be used as evidence in court or before any government body, except for specific situations outlined below.
Information about a patient given to these committees can be discovered during legal discovery processes, but it does not lose its protected status. However, a patient's identity remains private unless they agree to reveal it.
This rule does not change the ability to use original medical records as evidence, and it does not stop relevant evidence from being used in criminal cases.
Section § 1156.1
This law allows certain established committees to conduct research and studies to reduce disease or death rates, and they can provide their findings to the county and state. Generally, their recorded discussions and findings cannot be used as evidence in legal or administrative actions, except under specific circumstances.
It also clarifies that patient information remains protected by confidentiality laws, but such information can be discovered during legal procedures, provided it doesn't reveal patient identities without consent. However, the law ensures that the original medical records of a patient remain admissible in court, and evidence relevant to criminal cases is not excluded.
Section § 1156.5
This law says that evidence of 'excited delirium' can't be used in civil court cases. People involved in a case can talk about someone's behavior, like being agitated or violent, but they can't label it as 'excited delirium.' This term isn't included in the official mental health diagnosis manual and may not have enough scientific backing to be considered a real medical condition. It refers to intense states of excitement, aggression, and seeming insensitivity to pain.
Section § 1157
This law shields the discussions and records of various medical and healthcare provider committees that oversee the quality of care from being examined in a legal case. Basically, what is discussed in these committee meetings can't be used as evidence in court or be inspected for legal proceedings.
However, there are exceptions. If a person from the meeting is directly involved in a legal case related to the meeting's subject, or if someone is seeking hospital staff privileges or is in a lawsuit against an insurance company about a settlement, these protections don't apply. Also, if the committee is too large (more than 10% of its society’s membership) or if a person has a conflict of interest because their own conduct is under review, they can’t use this shield.
This section also notes that these protections don’t apply if the case involves criminal charges, meaning such discussions can be used in criminal court. Lastly, it clarifies that terms related to emergency medical personnel are as defined in a specific health and safety code section.
Section § 1157.5
This statute says that, unless a health care provider is seeking payment for services, the rules preventing discovery or testimony in certain cases (referenced in Section 1157) also apply to committees of nonprofit medical foundations or professional standards review organizations. These committees are organized to assess the necessity, quality, and cost justification of health services.
Section § 1157.6
This law protects the privacy of proceedings and records from committees focused on improving mental health care in county-operated facilities. These records can't be made public or used in a legal discovery, which is the process of gathering evidence for a case. Attendees of these committee meetings aren't required to testify about what happened there, unless the person is directly involved in a legal case related to the meeting’s subject or is seeking privileges to work at the facility.
Section § 1157.7
This law states that rules preventing the discovery or testimony about certain committee proceedings and records, as outlined in Section 1157, also apply to special committees made by local government. These committees look into the quality and necessity of specialized health services, like trauma care, provided by specific hospitals. Additionally, certain government transparency laws do not apply to these committee records and proceedings. This means their meetings and records are not open to public access or scrutiny under those laws.
Section § 1158
This section defines who counts as a "medical provider," including doctors, dentists, nurses, therapists, psychologists, pharmacists, and hospitals. It gives procedures for attorneys to request a patient's medical records before a lawsuit is filed or before the defendant appears in court. The request must come with proper written authorization from the patient or their representative.
Medical providers must make records available within five days of the request, and they can charge reasonable fees for this. If they fail to do so, they may be liable for costs, including attorney fees, incurred to enforce this right. However, attorneys can have a professional photocopier retrieve the records instead of relying on the medical provider's staff.
The law also covers records held electronically and specifies that if requested, these should be produced in electronic form. Providers must accept completed authorization forms if in a certain format, and they can't make medical treatment conditional on the submission of these forms.
Section § 1159
This law states that evidence from live animal experimentation, like crash tests, cannot be used in court for product liability cases involving motor vehicles.
It applies to trials that hadn’t begun by January 1, 1993.
Section § 1160
This California law states that if someone expresses sympathy or kindness after an accident, such as saying they're sorry for the pain or death involved, those words or actions can't be used as evidence to prove they are at fault in a civil lawsuit. However, if the person actually admits to being at fault, that part can be used in court.
An 'accident' here means an unexpected event causing injury or death, not something done on purpose. 'Benevolent gestures' are actions showing compassion, and 'family' includes close relatives like spouses, parents, siblings, and children.
Section § 1161
This law section states that if someone is a victim of human trafficking, any evidence showing they've engaged in prostitution or similar acts due to trafficking cannot be used to claim they are criminally responsible for those acts. Additionally, a victim's past sexual activities or involvement in commercial sexual acts cannot be used to question their honesty or character in any legal proceedings.
Section § 1162
This California law states that if someone is a victim or a witness of serious crimes like assault, domestic violence, or human trafficking, any evidence that they engaged in prostitution around the time they were involved with these crimes cannot be used against them in a separate prostitution case. This rule protects them from being prosecuted for prostitution in connection with their victim or witness status.