BILL OF PARTICULARS CALIFORNIA CODE
BILL OF PARTICULARS CALIFORNIA TRIAL

Since no contract in writing was pleaded or proved, the first cause of action went out of the case, and plaintiff had to rely on her second count based on a quantum meruit (Long v. Such invalidity was pleaded by the denials contained in the answer (Healy v.

BILL OF PARTICULARS CALIFORNIA CODE

Under Civil Code, section 1624, subdivision 6, and Code of Civil Procedure, section 1973, subdivision 6, an oral contract such as that alleged is invalid. To each count appellant entered a general denial and pleaded the two-year statute of limitations. In the second count plaintiff alleged that decedent became indebted to her 'for services rendered,' of the reasonable value of $64,000. The first count of the verified complaint alleged an oral contract made in 1941 whereby in consideration of plaintiff's promise to marry decedent, and of services rendered and to be rendered by her to him, he agreed that instead of paying her in cash for her services at current wages he would leave her all his property in compensation for her services that she accepted the offer of marriage and agreed to perform certain services consisting of housekeeping, nursing care and attention assisting in the management and operation of decedent's bakery business, and assisting in keeping books and accounts of his business interests that she performed such services from February 15, 1941, until decedent's death in April, 1947, and that they were of the reasonable value of $64,000. Appellant moved for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict and on its denial judgment on the verdict was entered and this appeal taken. The jury brought in a verdict for $7,500. Respondent filed a creditor's claim for $64,000 against decedent's estate and on its rejection commenced this action. TOM COFFIS, as Administrator, etc., Appellant. State codes of CRIMINAL PROCEDURE and the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure regulate the use of bills of particulars in criminal prosecutions in their respective courts.LENA BANCHERO, Respondent, v. As in civil procedure, a bill of particulars is not intended to serve as a discovery device. The defendant is given notice of the offenses with which he or she is charged so that a defense may be prepared and the possibility of surprise or DOUBLE JEOPARDY avoided. It is submitted by the prosecution to the defendant, at the defendant's demand, to provide the facts alleged in the complaint or the indictment that related to the commission of the crime. In CRIMINAL LAW, a bill of particulars serves the same purpose. If, however, the information sought by such a motion is obtainable by use of discovery mechanisms, the motion will be denied. In federal courts the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure have replaced the use of a bill of particulars with a motion for a more definite statement. State codes of CIVIL PROCEDURE impose rules that govern the use of bills of particulars in civil actions brought in state court.

BILL OF PARTICULARS CALIFORNIA TRIAL

It is not to be used as a discovery device to learn the evidence or strategy to be used at trial by the opposing party.

A bill of particulars is neither a PLEADING nor proof of the facts it states, but, rather, an elucidation of a pleading. It also serves to expedite the orderly progress of judicial proceedings by reducing, if not eliminating, the need for the amendment of ambiguous or vague pleadings. Its function is to give the party who requests it knowledge of what the opposing party has alleged in order to protect the party requesting the bill from surprise and in order to establish the real issues of the action. A bill can be submitted either voluntarily or pursuant to a court order for compliance with the demand. Although usually requested by a defendant, it can be demanded by a plaintiff if the defendant makes a counterclaim for a setoff or asserts a defense against him or her. In civil actions a bill of particulars is a written demand for the specifics of why an action at law was brought.

Bill of particulars california