CALIFORNIA FAMILY LAW
...Procedure Before Trial/Hearing
......Trials/Requests for Orders
.........Oral Testimony: Exclusion of
 22 Cards On This Topic:
  • Law and motion calendar conducted by declaration or request for judicial notice only.
  • Affidavits/Declarations may be used “upon a motion, and in any other case expressly permitted by statute.”
  • Court may not adopt local rules that conflict with state law; declarations are generally inadmissible hearsay and may not be used as a basis to decide trials (as opposed to motions).
  • Live testimony properly denied upon a showing of good cause and the proffered evidence was not relevant and within the scope of the hearing.
  • No error to deny an evidentiary hearing where party doesn't specify the relevant evidence which will be produced and instead relies on vague representations.
  • Postjudgment attorney fee requests are dealt with as motions, not trials, and may properly be heard on declarations.
  • Declarations W submitted with her opposition to H's support RFO were not automatically in evidence and no error in not admitting them as she did not request admission and hearing was based on live testimony.
  • There is no right to present live testimony at the bifurcated portion of a trial dealing with attorney fees.
  • The trial court is not required to allow oral testimony at a motion under DVPA.
  • F who did not request right to cross-examine mother cannot complain Elkins violated.
  • Trial court may exclude oral testimony in postjudgment motions and decide solely on affidavits.
  • OSCs may require that live testimony be admitted such that trial ct. can have sufficient evidence to make proper order.
  • No constitutional problem hearing post-trial OSC on declarations where issue purely one of law.
  • Trial court did not err by declining to grant P's request to present testimonial evidence at hearing on motion to strike petition to dissolve domestic partnership.
  • Trial court erred by not swearing in witnesses at emancipation hearing per statutory requirements of Family and Evidence Codes.
  • In refusing to hear parties' witnesses re harassment injunction request, court deprived both parties of important rights expressly preserved to them by CCP 527.6.
  • Oral testimony at motion to strike properly precluded.
  • Informality of DA support & disso hearings does not include disputed fact issues based on mere statements; requires statements under penalty of perjury, offers of proof, oral testimony.
  • Any doubt should be resolved in favor of live-witness testimony where the issue is a potential "move away" in custody motion.
  • Oral argument generally matter of privilege, not right, in motions; but required where due process involved (sanctions).
  • Trial court has discretion to permit or deny right to cross-examine other party's I&E declaration.
  • Motions for new trial are to be made solely on basis of affidavits.


    •