Advocates for Justice

Text messages are gold. They are typically sent without the forethought of a letter or email, so they typically reveal persuasive evidence of the sender’s mental state at the time the message is sent. Relevant texts between the parties are coming in. But texts to a third party present special issues of authentication. This article discusses those issues.

A text message is a writing that must be authenticated. (Evid. Code §§ 250, 1401(a).) Authentication requires a showing that the writing was made or signed by its purported maker. It’s important to remember that the maker’s testimony is not necessary. (Evid. Code § 1411.) Instead, authenticity may be established by the contents of the writing (Evid. Code § 1421) or by witness testimony, circumstantial evidence, content, or location. (People v. Goldsmith (2014) 59 Cal. 4th 258, 268.) The recent published case of Adoption of X.D. (2025) WL 2753550 addresses self-authenticating writings.

Reputation damage from online defamation can feel overwhelming, especially in the wake of high-profile cases like Johnny Depp v. Amber Heard, which suggest that clearing one’s name is a grueling and uncertain process. However, for private individuals, the legal system offers robust protections that make winning back your reputation far more attainable than commonly believed. Unlike public figures, who must prove “actual malice” in defamation cases, private individuals need only demonstrate that false and harmful statements were made negligently. This lower burden of proof means that everyday people can and do win defamation suits regularly. The article dispels myths fueled by celebrity cases, explains the legal distinctions between public and private plaintiffs, and offers practical advice for those facing reputational attacks: act quickly, document harm, and focus on the defendant’s negligence. Ultimately, the law is designed to protect private individuals from careless or malicious attacks, making reputation recovery not just possible, but achievable.

MICRA has been a contentious issue since its inception in 1975. For nearly half a century, its cap on non-economic damages remained stagnant at $250,000 despite skyrocketing inflation and living costs. At long last, it was increased to $350,000 two years ago; however, this limit still leaves potential victims with inadequate compensation for their pain, suffering, and emotional distress.

The destruction caused by wildfires is nothing short of devastating. Damages extend far beyond the loss of physical property. Victims often face the toll of losing not just their homes but also their sense of safety and stability.

Potential losses may include:

• Property damage, including dwelling and contents
• Expenses related to evacuation and temporary residence
• Personal injury, wrongful death, and emotional distress

Choosing a law firm to represent you in wildfire litigation takes careful consideration. This decision will have long-lasting impacts on your recovery—both financially and emotionally.

If you have been impacted by the recent Eaton Fire in Altadena, our CPM wildfire litigation team is here to help. With extensive experience in high-stakes litigation against utility companies, we are dedicated to making you whole following this devastating disaster.

Need to hire a wildfire attorney? Before you sign a fee agreement, make sure you ask a lawyer these 7 questions first.