• Intentional interference with contractual relations
• Intentional interference with prospective economic advantage
• Negligent interference with prospective economic advantage

Intentional Interference with Contractual Relations

• There was a valid contract between the plaintiff and a third party;
• Defendant knew about the contract
• By engaging in this conduct the defendant had the intention to disrupt the relationship or knew that disruption of the relationship was substantially certain to occur
• The relationship was disrupted
• The plaintiff was harmed as the result of the defendant's conduct

Intentional Interference with Prospective Economic Advantage

• The plaintiff and a third party were in an economic relationship that probably would have resulted in an economic benefit to him
• Defendant knew about the relationship
• Defendant engaged in a wrongful conduct
• By engaging in this conduct defendant intended to disrupt the relationship or knew that the disruption was substantially certain to occur
• The relationship was disrupted
• The plaintiff was harmed as the result of the defendant's conduct

Negligent Interference with Prospective Economic Advantage

• The plaintiff and a third party were in an economic relationship that probably would have resulted in an economic benefit to him
• Defendant knew about the relationship and was aware or should have been aware that in case he didn't act with due care his actions would interfere with the relationship
• Defendant was negligent and failed to act with reasonable care
• The relationship was disrupted
• The plaintiff was harmed as the result of the defendant's conduct

Damages a Plaintiff Can Recover When Bringing a Successful Claim Against the Defendant

California's court system is the nation's biggest and serves over thirty-nine million people - about 12 percent of the total American population.

About Superior Courts of California

There are fifty-eight trial courts in California, one in each county. A judge and sometimes a jury hears the testimony of witnesses and other proof in trial courts or superior courts and chooses cases by applying the appropriate law to the appropriate facts. The judiciary in California serve almost thirty-four million individuals.

Until June 1998, the trial courts of California were made up of superior and municipal courts, each with their own jurisdiction and the number of judges set by the Legislature. Proposition 220 file type icon was endorsed by California voters in June 1998, a constitutional amendment that allowed the judges in each county to merge their superior and municipal courts into a «unified», or single, superior court.

All 58 counties in California had also voted to unify their trial courts as of February 2001.

According to the Code of Civil Procedure of California:

• Superior courts proceedings shall be extended throughout the state.
• Day to day adjournments, or from time to time, shall be interpreted as recesses in the sessions and shall not prevent the Court from sitting at any time.
• Despite anything to the contrary contained in any other law of that State, the judges of the superior court of the county in which the main office is situated in that state may, at their discretion, take ownership of any savings and loan association whose company, property and assets are held by the Commissioner of Financial Institutions.
• By law, the superior court in any county may provide that, whenever all magistrates are absent from the county, any uncontested matter in which no proof is needed or which may be presented on affidavits shall be deemed to have been presented by the party or the attorney of the party or by the deadline set for the hearing upon filing with the clerk of a declaration of consent.
• There is a superior court appeal division in each county composed of three judges or four judges when the Chief Justice considers it necessary.

The Decision or Judgement of The Superior Court

The competition of two judges of the Superior Court's appeal division shall be essential for the rendering of the judgment in each situation and for the transaction of any other company except that which the presiding judge of the division may do in the chambers. In an appeal, an appeal division's decision shall contain a short declaration of the grounds for the judgement. There is inadequate a judgement saying only «affirmed» or «reversed».

Transcripts of the Superior Court

Court proceedings may be recorded or electronically taped by a court reporter.

Transcripts applications in civil and probate matters for privately owned court reporters must be created directly with the private court reporter. A paper transcript or a copy of an electronic recording may be accessible upon request, depending on the recording of a particular event.

According to 18 USC § 152 and 18 USC § 157 Bankruptcy Fraud is committed when a person makes a misleading claim or false statement in a bankruptcy proceeding or intentionally files a fraudulent bankruptcy petition as part of a larger scheme to defraud.

Bankruptcy Fraud can be prosecuted through numerous criminal statutes such as wire fraud, mail fraud, credit card fraud, conspiracy, or tax fraud. The most prevalent charge is Bankruptcy Fraud under USC Section 152 which covers all possible methods that a debtor or other person can employ to defraud any bankruptcy filing or proceeding.

Willfully and Intentionally Committing Bankruptcy Fraud

The defendant can't accidentally commit bankruptcy fraud. Criminal fraud always involves knowingly misleading the court, hiding assets, or taking other fraudulent actions.

Examples of Bankruptcy Fraud

Examples of bankruptcy fraud include the following

• Concealing property belonging to a debtor
• Making a false statement or declaration under penalty of perjury in connection with a bankruptcy
• Concealing or transferring property in contemplation of a bankruptcy case
• Making a false claim against the estate of a debtor
• Withholding documents from the administrators of any bankruptcy
• Illegally receiving property from a debtor
• Receiving or giving any bribe in relation to a bankruptcy
• Making a false oath or accounts in relation to any bankruptcy
• Destroying or concealing documents related to a bankruptcy or a debtor

Defenses to Bankruptcy Fraud

Good faith belief

In case the defendant honestly and in good faith believed the misleading statements or promises made as part of the scheme were true it is a valid defense in federal bankruptcy charges.

Substantial Assistance

Usually, the most commonly utilized method to avoid the penalties for federal bankruptcy fraud is substantial assistance. The prosecution is authorized to ask the court to suspend or reduce a sentence when the defendant provides substantial assistance in the arrest, identification, or conviction of any other person engaged in the scheme to defraud.

Penalties for violating 18 U.S. Code Chapter 9

Under federal law, the punishment for Bankruptcy Fraud may vary depending on the circumstances, nature and of the offense, and the defendant's criminal history. Under 18 U.S. Code Section 157 the crime of Bankruptcy Fraud is a felony, punishable by:

• Up to five years in federal prison
• A fine of up to $250,000.
• Probation is also possible in bankruptcy fraud cases. For the probation period, the defendant will be required to comply with specific orders, such as not committing more crimes and meeting with a probation officer. Usually, probation lasts from one to three years, however, longer sentences are possible.
• The defendant will be additionally required to pay restitution and forfeit any property or money obtained from the scheme to defraud.

Elements the Plaintiff Must Prove

• The driver was negligent in operating the vehicle
• Defendant was the owner of the vehicle at the time of the injury to the plaintiff
• Defendant by his words or conduct, gave permission to the driver to use the vehicle. Permission cannot be left to conjecture nor be assumed; it must be affirmatively proved.

Explicit and Implied Permission

The Driver Exceeded the Scope of the Permission Given by the Defendant

• Defendant by words or conduct, gave permission to the driver to use the vehicle for a limited time, place, or purpose
• The driver's use of the vehicle substantially violated the time, place, or purpose specified.

Driver Was Acting on Behalf of the Owner

The Owner Acted with Independent Negligence

Motor Vehicle Owner Liability Video

Elements of Defamation

• Defendant made an intentional publication of a statement of fact
• The fact is false
• The fact is unprivileged
• The fact has a natural tendency to injure or cause special damage
• Defendant's fault in publishing the statement is at least considered negligence.

Methods of Making Defamatory Statements:

• Slander: According to California Civil Code Section 46, slander is a false and unprivileged publication, orally uttered, which charges any person with crime, imputes in a person the existence of an infectious, contagious, or loathsome disease, tends directly to injure him in respect to his office, profession, trade or business, imputes to a person impotence or a want of chastity.
• Libel: According to California Civil Code Section 45 libel is defined as a false and unprivileged publication by writing, picture, printing, effigy, or other fixed representation to the eye, which exposes any person to hatred, ridicule, contempt or obloquy, or which causes him to be avoided or shunned, or which tends to injure him in his occupation.

Defamation per SE

Defamation per Quod

Public Figures

• Author
• Television personality
• Real-estate developer
• Founder of a church

What Can a Victim Win in a Defamation Case?

• Back pay
• Lost Wages
• Pain and Suffering
• Punitive Damages

Legal Defenses for Defamation Claims

• Defendant's statement wasn't published
• Defendant made a true statement
• Defendant's statement was privileged
• Defendant's statement wasn't made with malice
• Defendant's statement wasn't made negligently

California Defamation Claim Video

Whistleblowing usually involves raising concerns about a company's negligent, unethical, unlawful, fake, fraudulent or dangerous action. The behavior can vary from violating corporate policy and procedural requirements to unlawful transactions, or to a threat against public safety, health, including fraud and safety violations.

Elements the Plaintiff Must Establish

According to CACI 4603 to establish the claim the plaintiff must be able to prove the following elements:

• Defendant was the plaintiff's employer
• Defendant believed that the plaintiff might disclose or had disclosed to a law enforcement agency, government agency or any person with authority over the plaintiff or an employee with authority to discover, investigate, or correct the noncompliance or legal violations which specify information disclosed or
• Plaintiff provided information to testify before a public body that was conducting an investigation, inquiry or hearing or
• Plaintiff refused to specify activity in which he refused to participate
• Plaintiff had reasonable cause to believe that the information disclosed a violation of a state or federal statute, or a violation of noncompliance with a local, state, or federal rule or regulation
• Plaintiff's disclosure of information or refusal to specify was a contributing factor in the defendant's decision to discharge him
• Defendant's conduct caused harm to the plaintiff

The plaintiff must have a reasonable belief that the defendant's policies violated federal, state, or local statutes, rules, or regulations. The disclosure of policies that an employee considers gross misconduct, wasteful, unwise is not protected. Disclosure of information is protected even though disclosing can be a part of the plaintiff's work duties.

Protections, That Are Available to Whistleblowers

• The employer is not allowed to adopt, make, or enforce any regulation, rule, or policy preventing his employee from being a whistleblower.
• The employer cannot retaliate against a whistleblower employee
• The employer cannot retaliate against an employee, who refuses to participate in an activity that can result in a violation of a federal or state statute or a non-compliance or violation of a federal or state regulation or rule
• The employer cannot retaliate against an employee, who has exercised his rights as a whistleblower in any previous employment.

In case the employer fires the employee for whistleblowing illegal information, his action would be considered wrongful termination, and he will be penalized for workplace retaliation against whistleblowers. Whistleblowers have a right to remain anonymous, employers can try to discover who made the complaint or file a False Claim Act case.

Some General Situations, Including Law Violations at Workplace:

• Misleading business practices
• Violations of health and safety regulations
• Racial discrimination
• Sexual harassment
• False invoices
• Fraudulent financial document
• Lying loan documents
• Tax fraud
• False claims

Do Whistleblowers Get Rewards in California?

Whistleblowing laws in California can provide monetary rewards to whistleblowers who managed to successfully recover funds for the government. In case the whistleblowing was related to fraud against the government, the person can receive a monetary reward through a qui tam lawsuit. According to the False Claims Act, a person who supports stopping fraud can receive up to thirty percent of what the government recovers from the guilty party.

In some cases, whistleblowers can also receive compensation for the emotional distress they suffered as a result of retaliation by the company or individual they reported.

Bribery is an act of offering giving, receiving, or soliciting something of value for the purpose of influencing the acts of a public official in discharge of his legal or public duties.

18 U.S.C. § 201(b)(1): Bribery of a Public Official

Defendant is guilty of bribing a public official in case he directly or indirectly gives or promises to give something of value to the public official with intention to corruptly influence the public official to omit or perform an official act in violation of the official's public duty.

Corrupt action is any intentionally performed action with an illegal purpose.

Public official is any officer, agent or employee of the US or any agency, department, or branch of the federal government who is acting in an official capacity. For the purposes of this crime jurors sitting on a federal jury will also fall within the definition of the public official.

According to 18 U.S.C. § 201(a) official act is any action or decision that may be brought before a public official in his official capacity.

18 U.S.C. § 201(c)(1)(A): Illegal Gratuity to a Public Official

Defendant is guilty of providing illegal gratuity to a public official in case he directly or indirectly offers or gives something of value to a public official because of an official act performed by the public official.

For proving the violation the prosecutor must establish that there is a relationship between the "something of value" and the official act for which it was conferred.

18 U.S.C. § 215(a) (1): Bribery or Reward of a Bank Officer

Defendant is guilty of bribery of a bank officer in case he offers or gives something of value to a bank officer with intention of influencing the bank officer and in connection with a business transaction.

Bank officer is any director, agent, employee, or other office of a financial institution.

Legal defenses to federal bribery charges

• Lack of Evidence

For convicting the defendant the prosecution must prove beyond the reasonable doubt all elements of crime. In case there is a lack of evidence proving the defendant's fault he can't be found guilty of federal bribery.

• Lack of Intent

In federal bribery cases, the prosecutor must establish that the defendant had the criminal intent to commit the crime. One of the most difficult areas of the government's case is proving intent, and if the defendant can present arguments and evidence to show that he did not possess the intent to commit the alleged criminal activity, he won't be found guilty of this crime.

Penalties for Federal Bribery

Penalties for violating 18 U.S.C. § 201(b)(1)

• Up to fifteen years in federal prison
• A fine of up of an amount not more than three times the monetary equivalent of the thing of value offered to the public official.

Penalties for violating 18 U.S.C. § 201(c)(1)(A):

• Up to two years in federal prison and/or fines

Penalties for violating 18 U.S.C. §215(a) (1):

If the amount of the "something of value" offered or provided to the bank officer is more than $1000, the penalties are the following:

• Up to thirty years in federal prison
• Fines of up to $1,000,000 or three times the value given, whichever is greater.

If the amount of the "something of value" is less than $1,000, the defendant will receive up to one year in federal prison and fines.

Elements of Malicious Prosecution in California:

• Legal action prosecuted or commenced without probable cause: If the claim is brought without justification, the case is without probable cause. Generally probable cause is analyzed on a claim-by-claim basis, meaning that every claim brought and prosecuted without probable cause can support a claim for malicious prosecution.
• Legal action was initiated with malice or malicious intent
• Final resolution of the claim in the defendant's favor. The defendant in the malicious prosecution action must prevail on the underlying suit – at least with regard to the causes of action for which malicious prosecution is claimed.
• Legal Damages: The actions cause economic and non-economic, which can be considered and must be proven at trial.

What Must the Plaintiff Prove?

• Defendant was actively involved in bringing about the lawsuit
• Lawsuit ended in the plaintiff's favor
• No reasonable person in the defendant's circumstances would have believed that there was a reasonable ground to bring the lawsuit against the plaintiff
• Defendant acted mainly for a purpose other than succeeding on the merits of the claim
• Plaintiff was harmed as a result of defendant's conduct

Proceedings Which Give Rise to Malicious Prosecution Claims:

• Judicial arbitrations
• Private arbitration agreements which obviously allow for the malicious prosecution remedy
• Probate proceedings
• Declaratory relief claims
• Order to Show Cause proceedings, associated with pending litigation (except in family law proceedings)

Who Can Be Liable for Malicious Prosecution?

• A person, who unsuccessfully prosecuted an underlying action as an individual party plaintiff can be considered liable for malicious prosecution. Though, the degree of personal liability of directors and officers of a corporate plaintiff is not clear. CACI 1501 references those who are "actively involved in bringing or continuing the lawsuit," which can include those who become later involved in the continued prosecution of the prior action.
• The attorney who originally initiated the underlying action is potentially liable for malicious prosecution. Successor or later involved counsel who associate or into the underlying action are also subject to liability.

Types of Damages Which the Victim Can Recover in Successful Malicious Prosecution Claim:

• Pain and suffering
• Loss of reputation
• Emotional distress
• Embarrassment
• Attorney fees
• Lost wages
• Costs of litigation
• Medical and psychological therapy costs
• All court fees and expenses

Malicious Prosecution Video

Chapter 18 of the United States Code, Section 371 criminalizes both conspiracies to defraud the US as well as conspiracies to violate any other provision of federal law. According to the statute it is illegal for two or more persons to conspire either for committing an offense against the US, or to defraud the United States, or any agency in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of these persons act in a way that furthers the conspiracy.

Elements of Federal Conspiracy

The prosecution must establish the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt for convicting the defendant in violation of 18 U.S.C Section 371

• There was an agreement between at least two people with intent to defraud or commit an offense against the United States government
• Defendant willfully joined the agreement
• Defendant or other conspirator committed an overt act with intention to further the conspiracy.

"Defraud" Element in Federal Conspiracy Crimes

For the purposes of this statute term "to defraud" in the United States means:

• Impairing or obstructing the efficiency of any department of the US government, to destroy its reports and operation as fair, impartial, and reasonably accurate;
• Cheating the government out of property or money

Knowing Participation in Federal Conspiracy

The prosecution must establish that the defendant had some knowledge of the conspiracy's objectives. But for being considered a participant in a conspiracy defendant doesn't have to know about every objective of the conspiracy, or be aware of the identities of other conspirators.

Overt Act is any act or statement that is knowingly done by one or more conspirators with intention to further the aim of the conspiracy. It is important to mention that a conviction for conspiracy under 18 U.S.C Section 371does not necessarily require underlying criminal act to be completed.

Defenses to Federal Conspiracy Charges

• Defendant did not willfully join the agreement

According to 18 U.S. Code 371, for being found guilty defendant must intend to agree, and have intention to commit the crime. A forced agreement made under threat or duress or is not enough for convicting the defendant.

• There was no overt act for furthering the conspiracy

According to 18 U.S. Code 371 there must be an overt act to further the conspiracy. So if a conspiracy agreement was found, but no act was made to further the alleged agreement, defendant should not be convicted of federal conspiracy.

Penalties for violating 18 U.S.C Section 371

• Up to five years in federal prison
• A fine up to $250,000, or up to $500,000 in the case of conspiracy by organizations.
• But if, the crime, the commission of which was the object of the conspiracy, is only a misdemeanor, the punishment for that conspiracy cannot exceed the maximum punishment provided for such misdemeanor.

Elements the Plaintiff Must Prove

• Defendant designed, distributed, manufactured, or sold a defective product
• Product contained the defect when it left the defendant's possession
• Plaintiff used the product in a reasonably foreseeable manner
• As a result of the defect the plaintiff suffered harm

Strict Product Liability in California

Types of Claims Under Strict Product Liability

• Manufacturing defect claims, which involve a defect in a specific item produced
• Design defect claims, which involve a defect in the design of an entire product line
• Failure to warn claims, which involve the defendant's liability for improperly warning the plaintiff about the hazards of using the product

Manufacturing Defect Claims

Design Defect Claims

• The Risk-Benefit Test

• The Consumer Expectations Test

Failure to Warn Claim