Breaking Barriers to Justice
This creates an opportunity: if the defendant removes the case, or if federal claims appear in the pleadings, consider conducting financial discovery under the more permissive federal standards. At minimum, negotiate stipulations providing that (1) the parties bifurcate punitive damages as in state court, (2) the defendant produces financial condition information upon the required finding, and (3) the plaintiff’s failure to list financial evidence in pretrial filings does not bar admission in phase two. Submit such stipulations as court orders.
Leverage Colonial Life Discovery for Indirect Financial Evidence
Pattern-of-conduct discovery under Colonial Life does not face § 3295(c)’s substantial-probability standard because its primary purpose is substantive, proving malice or ratification, rather than establishing financial condition. But documents obtained through Colonial Life discovery often contain financial information as a byproduct: settlement amounts, reserve calculations, profit analyses, and internal memoranda discussing the economic consequences of various courses of action. This indirect route may provide financial evidence that otherwise remains unavailable before a liability finding.
The Profits Alternative
Civil Code § 3295(a) permits discovery of not only financial condition but also “the profits the defendant gains by virtue of the wrongful course of conduct.” In some cases, ill-gotten profits prove easier to establish than overall net worth. If the fraud generates $5 million in provable profits, that figure alone may support a meaningful punitive award without wading into balance-sheet disputes. Some appellate authority, including Cummings Medical Corp. v. Occupational Medical Corp. (1992) 10 Cal.App.4th 1291, holds that evidence of wrongfully obtained profits qualifies as adequate evidence upon which to base a punitive award. While subsequent cases question this rule’s scope, profits evidence remains valuable as part of a comprehensive financial presentation.
The Post-Verdict Continuance
Following a favorable verdict on liability and the required culpability findings, immediately move for a brief continuance to obtain financial evidence. Cite Mike Davidov for the proposition that courts may order production following a liability determination, and request a court order directing the defendant to produce specified categories of documents within a defined period. If the defendant refuses, the Mike Davidov waiver doctrine applies. Document the refusal carefully. At the punitive phase, argue that the defendant’s disobedience precludes any complaint about the absence of financial evidence.
Federal Court Differences
The PMK Deposition: Pinning Down the Custodian
In federal court, Civil Code § 3295(c)’s prohibitions on pretrial financial discovery may not apply to claims arising under federal law. Federal procedural rules, not California discovery limitations, govern.
Consider noticing a deposition of the defendant’s Person Most Knowledgeable regarding financial condition, contingent on prevailing at the pretrial § 3295(c) motion or at trial. Having the PMK identified
36
Consumer Attorneys of California
FORUM July/August 2026
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs