4DCA Division 1 Oral Argument - 2026/05/14 - May 14, 2026

argument

4DCA Division 1 Oral Argument - 2026/05/14

California Fourth District Court of Appeal, Division One 3h 44m 7 chapters transcribed 1 month ago official recording ↗

▲ 0

Transcript

jump: chapters · find in transcript

Transcript

Transcript generated automatically by AI and may contain errors.

What does the court’s roll call and initial procedural setup cover?

Unknown 7:14

Your Honor should affirm the trial court's th thorough and well reasoned order that dismissed appellants. Running some to where.

Scott Morrison 7:29

Council, your mic is on.

Lily 12:17

Good morning. This is Lily from the clerk's office. I'll be taking roll call of those of you appearing remotely. Can you please unmute your microphone and turn on your video? And when you hear your name, please state your presence. Tamara freeze. Present. Thank you. Richard Marka.

Unknown 12:40

Here.

Lily 12:40

Thank you. Michael Gogol.

Unknown 12:43

Good morning.

Lily 12:43

Good morning. And Scott Morrison.

Unknown 12:46

President.

Lily 12:47

Thank you. We ask that you keep your microphone muted and camera off until we call your case. As a reme as a reminder, the proceedings are live streamed on our website. If you experience any technical issues during the session, immediately call in using the phone number and access code that's on your invite. We'll be with you shortly, and the first case today is going to be Dang versus Gogo Law Office. Attorney Freeze and Marka, your Case will be the third case called, um, after there'll be a brief panel change. Thank you.

Unknown 16:09

Good morning. A few things before we get started this morning.

Unknown 16:24

won't be able to hear you and they'll stop you and make an argument to have you properly adjust it. If you use the restroom you have to come back through screening to come inside the courtroom. Any questions for me this morning? All right, thank you.

Lily 16:38

The first case is Dang versus Google Law Office, so you can come set up

Unknown 23:21

with the R. B. Williams Gayle. Good morning, everyone. Welcome, please have a seat. Uh welcome to the Court of Appeal. Uh on the first two cases this morning, I am joined uh on this panel by Justice Doe to my right, Justice Kellity to my left. Uh we're gonna ask your patients after those first two cases, we'll take a short break uh before a panel change. And And uh then we'll hear the remaining two cases. So uh we are going to begin this morning uh with Deng versus Gogol Law Office. And uh we have Mr. Deng, is that correct? Yes, good morning. All right, very well. Uh and I believe we have Mr. Gogol on remote, is that correct? Good morning, Your Honor. All right. Good morning, Mr. Gogel. All right, uh Mr. Deng, uh we're gonna let you start here uh in just a second.

Unknown 24:21

Uh could you tell me let's see you have requested uh seven and a half minutes, is that right for argument?

Mr. Deng 24:28

Yeah, something like that. Yeah, maybe ten ten minutes. Okay, all right.

Unknown 24:32

Uh and and would you like to reserve any of that time for rebuttal?

Mr. Deng 24:37

Uh Probably not

Unknown 24:40

Okay. Uh i if you decide you have some time left at the end of it uh in order to respond to Mr. Gogol, uh we'll let you we'll let you do that. Okay. Thank you. All right. Uh whenever you're ready, please begin.

Mr. Deng 24:52

Okay. Good morning, your honours. So I try to speak slowly because I know I have accent. So please let me know and I would be more than happy to repeat. So so I will do my best.

Unknown 25:07

Certainly.

Mr. Deng 25:08

So this appeal presents two narrow issues. The first Whether the litigation privilege applies to non communicative conduct statutory violations and use of legal procedures beyond their lawful purpose involving subpoena records. And a second. Whether the tri court should have allowed amendment. after accepting the plea, the facts as true. The Tri Court made several important findings. In a parent's favor. It's fine. The privacy claim was adequately pleased. It rejected a collateral estopio. And it did not require wo waiver at the pleading stage. But Despite those findings. The court still dismissed the claim. Based solely on The conclusion that Civil Code Section forty seven B Part of them. That ruling was too broad.

Mr. Deng 26:17

Because this case is about the limits of the litigation privilege. It is about a conduct. Not just the communication. And it also concerns whether legal procedures were used. for purposes outside what the law permits. This appeal also involves dismissal of the abuse of process claim. Which at minimum should have been allowed to amend. Abuse of process focuses on how legal tools are used Not simply what is said in the court. The issue is whether legal procedures were used. for purposes outside what the law intended.