# California Evidence Code - Citation: Cal. Evid. Code (Evid. Code) - Subject: California rules of evidence — privileges, authentication, hearsay, opinion testimony - Source: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codedisplayexpanded.xhtml?tocCode=EVID - Last verified: 2026-05-13 > Authored from canonical California sources; verify against > leginfo.legislature.ca.gov before relying. --- ## Overview The California Evidence Code (enacted 1965, effective 1967) is the comprehensive statutory codification of California's law of evidence. Unlike the Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE), which are court rules promulgated by the Supreme Court, the California Evidence Code is a statute enacted by the Legislature. For civil practitioners, the most-cited provisions are: the privilege rules (§§ 900–1070), the hearsay exceptions (§§ 1200–1390), the authentication and best evidence rules (§§ 1400–1567), and the mediation confidentiality rules (§§ 1115–1128). The Evidence Code governs all civil, criminal, and administrative proceedings in California courts. --- ## Division 1 — Preliminary Provisions and Construction (§§ 1–260) ### § 2 — Construction **Summary.** The Evidence Code shall be liberally construed to secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every proceeding to which it applies. ### § 100 — "Action" **Summary.** "Action" means any civil, criminal, or other proceeding in which evidence is taken and includes proceedings before a referee, commissioner, or arbitrator. The Evidence Code's privileges apply in arbitral proceedings. ### § 140 — "Evidence" **Summary.** "Evidence" means testimony, writings, material objects, or other things presented to the senses that are offered to prove the existence or nonexistence of a fact. --- ### § 210 — "Relevant Evidence" **Summary.** "Relevant evidence" means evidence having any tendency in reason to prove or disprove any disputed fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action. --- ### § 240 — "Unavailable as a Witness" **Summary.** A declarant is "unavailable" if the declarant is: (1) dead; (2) incapacitated; (3) absent and his or her whereabouts unknown after reasonable search; (4) exempt from testifying due to privilege; (5) persistent refusal to testify despite court order. Unavailability is a prerequisite for several hearsay exceptions (see §§ 1290, 1310). --- ## Division 4 — Burden of Proof; Burden of Producing Evidence; Presumptions and Inferences (§§ 500–670) ### § 500 — Burden of Proof **Summary.** A party has the burden of proof as to each fact that is essential to the party's claim or defense. The burden of proof in civil cases is generally preponderance of the evidence; clear and convincing evidence is required for fraud, oppression, malice (Civil Code § 3294), and certain other claims. ### § 520 — Innocence Presumed **Summary.** The presumption of innocence applies only in criminal cases; in civil cases, no equivalent presumption exists. There is no general presumption for or against either party in a civil case. ### § 600 — Presumptions Generally **Summary.** A presumption is an inference that the law requires the trier of fact to draw from a particular set of facts. Conclusive presumptions (§§ 620–623) cannot be rebutted; rebuttable presumptions affecting the burden of proof (§§ 630–647) or the burden of producing evidence (§§ 630–647) may be overcome by contrary evidence. --- ## Division 5 — Privileges (§§ 900–1070) ### § 900 — Scope of Division 5 **Summary.** The privilege rules in Division 5 govern all civil and criminal proceedings. California privileges are statutory; common law privileges were abolished. Privileges not codified in the Evidence Code may not be recognized. --- ### § 911 — No Privilege Except as Provided by Code **Summary.** No person has a privilege to refuse to be a witness or to refuse to disclose any matter in a proceeding unless the privilege is provided by statute (Constitution, Evidence Code, or other California statute). --- ### § 950–962 — Attorney-Client Privilege **Summary.** A client has a privilege to refuse to disclose, and to prevent another from disclosing, a confidential communication between client and lawyer. ``` § 950. "Lawyer" defined. As used in this article, "lawyer" means a person authorized, or reasonably believed by the client to be authorized, to practice law in any state or nation. § 951. "Client" defined. As used in this article, "client" means a person who, directly or through an authorized representative, consults a lawyer for the purpose of retaining the lawyer or securing legal service or advice from the lawyer in the lawyer's professional capacity. § 952. "Confidential communication" defined. As used in this article, "confidential communication between client and lawyer" means information transmitted between a client and his or her lawyer in the course of that relationship and in confidence by a means which, so far as the client is aware, discloses the information to no third persons other than those who are present to further the interest of the client in the consultation or those to whom disclosure is reasonably necessary for the transmission of the information or the accomplishment of the purpose for which the lawyer is consulted. § 954. Lawyer-client privilege. Subject to Section 912 and except as otherwise provided in this article, the client, whether or not a party, has a privilege to refuse to disclose, and to prevent another from disclosing, a confidential communication between client and lawyer if the privilege is claimed by: (a) The holder of the privilege; (b) A person who is authorized to claim the privilege by the holder; (c) The person who was the lawyer at the time of the confidential communication, but such person may not claim the privilege if there is no holder of the privilege in existence or if he is otherwise instructed by a person authorized to permit disclosure. ``` **Exceptions to attorney-client privilege:** - Crime or fraud (§ 956): communication in furtherance of crime or fraud - Breach of duty by lawyer or client (§ 958): relevant to breach - Joint clients (§ 962): between clients who were jointly represented - Deceased client — will dispute (§ 960) - Client's communication to prevent crime causing death or substantial bodily harm (§ 956.5) --- ### §§ 966–972 — Spousal Privileges **Summary.** California recognizes two spousal privileges: 1. **Privilege not to testify against spouse** (§ 970): A married person has a privilege not to testify against their spouse in any proceeding. The privilege belongs to the witness-spouse, not the defendant-spouse (reversed from federal law). 2. **Privilege for confidential marital communications** (§ 980): A spouse has a privilege to refuse to disclose communications made in confidence during the marriage, unless both spouses consent to the disclosure. ``` § 970. A married person has a privilege not to testify against his spouse in any proceeding. § 980. Subject to Section 912 and except as otherwise provided in this article, a spouse (or, if the spouse is dead, either party to the former marriage), whether or not a party, has a privilege during the marital or domestic partnership relationship and afterwards to refuse to disclose, and to prevent another from disclosing, a communication if he or she claims the privilege and the communication was made in confidence between them while they were spouses. ``` --- ### §§ 990–1007 — Physician-Patient Privilege **Summary.** A patient has a privilege to prevent their physician from disclosing information acquired in the course of professional treatment. The privilege is broadly construed; exceptions include: patient-litigant exception (§ 996, when the patient places their condition in issue), crime or fraud (§ 997), and breach of duty arising from physician-patient relationship (§ 999). ``` § 994. Subject to Section 912 and except as otherwise provided in this article, the patient, whether or not a party, has a privilege to refuse to disclose, and to prevent another from disclosing, a confidential communication between patient and physician if the privilege is claimed by: (a) The holder of the privilege; (b) A person who is authorized to claim the privilege by the holder of the privilege; or (c) The person who was the physician at the time of the confidential communication. ``` **Patient-litigant exception (§ 996).** When a patient files a personal injury or mental/emotional distress claim, the patient puts their medical condition at issue and the privilege is waived as to information relevant to that condition. --- ### §§ 1010–1028 — Psychotherapist-Patient Privilege **Summary.** Broader than the physician-patient privilege. Protects communications between patient and psychotherapist (licensed clinical social worker, psychologist, marriage and family therapist, etc.). Key exceptions: patient-litigant (§ 1016), dangerous patient (§ 1024 — therapist may disclose to prevent serious and imminent danger). --- ### §§ 1030–1034 — Clergyman Privilege **Summary.** A person has a privilege to refuse to disclose a penitential communication made in confidence to a member of the clergy in the member's professional capacity as spiritual adviser. --- ### §§ 1035–1036.2 — Sexual Assault Counselor / Domestic Violence Advocate Privilege **Summary.** Communications to a sexual assault or domestic violence counselor are privileged. These privileges are absolute; there is no patient-litigant exception. --- ### §§ 1040–1047 — Official Information and Identity of Informer **Summary.** A public entity has a privilege to refuse to disclose official information and the identity of a confidential informer, subject to a balancing test. Public official records are admissible under the hearsay exception (§ 1280). --- ### §§ 1060–1063 — Trade Secrets **Summary.** The owner of a trade secret has a privilege to refuse to disclose the secret and to prevent others from disclosing it, unless the court finds that allowance of the privilege will deny a party a fair adjudication of its claim or defense. --- ## Division 6 — Witnesses (§§ 700–795) ### § 700 — General Rule of Competency **Summary.** Every person is competent to be a witness except as provided by the Evidence Code. There is no general incompetency rule based on age, mental condition, or criminal record; these go to credibility, not competency. --- ### § 702 — Personal Knowledge Required **Summary.** A lay witness may not testify to a matter unless evidence is introduced sufficient to support a finding that the witness has personal knowledge of the matter. ``` (a) Subject to Section 801, the testimony of a witness concerning a particular matter is inadmissible unless he has personal knowledge of the matter. Against the objection of a party, such personal knowledge must be shown before the witness may testify concerning the matter. ``` --- ### § 720 — Expert Witness Qualification **Summary.** A person is qualified to testify as an expert if they have special knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education sufficient to qualify them as an expert on the subject to which their testimony relates. The trial court decides qualification; the standard is broad. --- ### §§ 800–870 — Opinion Testimony #### § 800 — Lay Opinion **Summary.** A lay witness may express an opinion only if it is both: (a) rationally based on the perception of the witness, and (b) helpful to a clear understanding of the testimony or the determination of a fact in issue. ``` If a witness is not testifying as an expert, his testimony in the form of an opinion is limited to such an opinion as is permitted by law, including but not limited to an opinion that is: (a) Rationally based on the perception of the witness; and (b) Helpful to a clear understanding of his testimony. ``` --- #### § 801 — Expert Opinion **Summary.** If a witness is testifying as an expert, the witness may state an opinion that is: (a) related to a subject sufficiently beyond common experience that the opinion will assist the trier of fact, and (b) based on matter the expert may reasonably rely upon in forming an opinion (including inadmissible evidence). ``` If a witness is testifying as an expert, his testimony in the form of an opinion is limited to such an opinion as is: (a) Related to a subject that is sufficiently beyond common experience that the opinion of an expert would assist the trier of fact; and (b) Based on matter (including his special knowledge, skill, experience, training, and education) perceived by or personally known to the witness or made known to him at or before the hearing, whether or not admissible, that is of a type that reasonably may be relied upon by an expert in forming an opinion upon the subject to which his testimony relates, unless an expert is precluded by law from using such matter as a basis for his opinion. ``` --- #### § 803 — Court-Appointed Expert **Summary.** The court may appoint one or more experts to investigate and report on a subject at issue in the action. A court-appointed expert may be examined by the court and by any party. --- #### § 870 — Sanity — Opinion of Lay Witness **Summary.** A lay witness may testify about the mental sanity of a person the witness personally observed. --- ## Division 7 — Relevance and Its Limits (§§ 350–380) ### § 350 — Only Relevant Evidence Admissible **Summary.** No evidence is admissible except relevant evidence. --- ### § 351 — All Relevant Evidence Admissible **Summary.** Except as provided by statute, all relevant evidence is admissible. --- ### § 352 — Exclusion of Relevant Evidence for Prejudice **Summary.** The court in its discretion may exclude evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the probability that its admission will (a) necessitate undue consumption of time, or (b) create substantial danger of undue prejudice, of confusing the issues, or of misleading the jury. ``` The court in its discretion may exclude evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the probability that its admission will (a) necessitate undue consumption of time or (b) create substantial danger of undue prejudice, of confusing the issues, or of misleading the jury. ``` **Key difference from FRE 403.** The California § 352 standard — "substantially outweighed" — mirrors FRE 403. However, California Evidence Code has no "confusion of the issues" vs. "unfair prejudice" distinction; California courts apply a unitary balance. --- ### § 356 — Completeness **Summary.** When part of a writing or conversation is introduced, the other party may introduce any other part of the writing or conversation that in fairness ought to be considered at the same time. --- ## Division 8 — Privileges Relating to Mediation (§§ 1115–1128) ### § 1115 — Definitions **Summary.** "Mediation" means a process in which a neutral third party (the mediator) facilitates communication between the disputants to assist them in reaching a mutually acceptable agreement. ### § 1119 — Mediation Confidentiality — Core Rule **Summary.** All evidence of anything said or any admission made in connection with a mediation is inadmissible and not subject to discovery. This is the bedrock rule of California mediation confidentiality. It applies to all parties, their attorneys, and the mediator. ``` § 1119. Except as otherwise provided in this chapter: (a) No evidence of anything said or any admission made for the purpose of, in the course of, or pursuant to, a mediation or a mediation consultation is admissible or subject to discovery, and disclosure of the evidence shall not be compelled, in any arbitration, administrative adjudication, civil action, or other noncriminal proceeding in which, pursuant to law, testimony can be compelled to be given. (b) No writing, as defined in Section 250, that is prepared for the purpose of, in the course of, or pursuant to, a mediation or a mediation consultation, is admissible or subject to discovery, and disclosure of the writing shall not be compelled, in any arbitration, administrative adjudication, civil action, or other noncriminal proceeding in which, pursuant to law, testimony can be compelled to be given. (c) All communications, negotiations, or settlement discussions by and between participants in the course of a mediation or a mediation consultation shall remain confidential. ``` --- ### § 1121 — Mediator Not Compellable **Summary.** Neither a mediator nor anyone present at a mediation may be compelled to testify about anything said or done at the mediation. The mediator has no duty to report, even about crimes. ### § 1123 — Written Settlement Agreement in Mediation **Summary.** A written settlement agreement prepared in connection with mediation is not confidential if the agreement (1) is signed by the settling parties and (2) states that it is enforceable or binding or words to that effect. The agreement is then admissible. --- ## Division 9 — Evidence Affected or Excluded by Extrinsic Policies ### §§ 1151–1155 — Remedial Measures and Similar Exclusions **Summary.** Evidence of subsequent remedial measures (§ 1151), offers to pay medical expenses (§ 1152), offers to compromise (§ 1152), and pleas in criminal cases (§ 1153) are generally inadmissible. The offer-to-compromise rule (§ 1152) is the California analog to FRE 408. --- ## Division 10 — Hearsay Evidence (§§ 1200–1390) ### § 1200 — Hearsay Rule **Summary.** "Hearsay evidence" is evidence of a statement made other than by a witness while testifying, that is offered to prove the truth of the matter stated. Hearsay is inadmissible unless an exception applies. ``` (a) "Hearsay evidence" is evidence of a statement that was made other than by a witness while testifying at the hearing and that is offered to prove the truth of the matter stated. (b) Except as provided by law, hearsay evidence is inadmissible. (c) This section shall be known and may be cited as the hearsay rule. ``` --- ### §§ 1220–1228 — Admissions of a Party **Summary.** A statement is not hearsay (or qualifies for an exception) when offered against a party who made the statement. Includes: - Party's own statement (§ 1220) - Adoptive admission (§ 1221) - Authorized admission (§ 1222) - Co-conspirator statement (§ 1223) ``` § 1220. Evidence of a statement is not made inadmissible by the hearsay rule when offered against the declarant in an action to which he is a party in either his individual or representative capacity, whether or not he is a witness. ``` --- ### § 1230 — Declarations Against Interest **Summary.** A statement that was against the declarant's pecuniary or proprietary interest when made is admissible if the declarant is unavailable as a witness (§ 240). This is a broader exception than the federal analog; includes statements against penal interest with corroboration. --- ### § 1235 — Inconsistent Statements **Summary.** An otherwise hearsay statement is admissible as substantive evidence (not just for impeachment) if it is inconsistent with the declarant's trial testimony and the declarant is subject to cross-examination. This is more liberal than FRE 801(d)(1)(A). --- ### § 1237 — Past Recollection Recorded **Summary.** A prior written statement of the witness is admissible if: (a) the statement was made at a time when the facts were fresh in the witness's memory; (b) the statement was made by or adopted by the witness; and (c) the witness is unable to recall the facts sufficiently to testify fully. --- ### § 1250 — Present Sense Impression / State of Mind **Summary.** Evidence of a statement of the declarant's existing state of mind, emotion, or physical sensation (including intent, plan, or motive) is admissible. Commonly used to admit statements showing intent to do an act (e.g., "I intend to pay the debt" or "I plan to send the letter"). --- ### § 1252 — Statement of Mental or Physical State **Summary.** A statement of the declarant's existing mental or physical condition is admissible if the statement was made in the regular course of the declarant's business and there was no motive to fabricate. --- ### § 1270 — Business Records — "Business" Defined **Summary.** "Business" includes every kind of business, governmental activity, nonprofit, and regular activity for purposes of the business records hearsay exception (§ 1271). --- ### § 1271 — Business Records — Core Exception **Summary.** The California business records exception. Evidence of a writing made as a record of an act, condition, or event is admissible if: (a) the writing was made in the regular course of the business; (b) the business regularly makes records of the act; (c) the writing was made at or near the time of the act; and (d) the sources of information and method of preparation indicate trustworthiness. This exception is central to consumer debt collection cases (to authenticate assignment records, account statements, and account-opening documents). ``` § 1271. Evidence of a writing made as a record of an act, condition, or event is not made inadmissible by the hearsay rule when offered to prove the act, condition, or event if: (a) The writing was made in the regular course of a business; (b) The writing was made at or near the time of the act, condition, or event; (c) The custodian or other qualified witness testifies to its identity and the mode of its preparation; and (d) The sources of information and method and time of preparation were such as to indicate its trustworthiness. ``` **Practice note in consumer debt cases.** In actions by assignee debt collectors, plaintiffs must authenticate account records under § 1271, typically through a custodian's declaration (see § 1561). Defendants should test the "regular course of business" foundation and the trustworthiness of records that were themselves created by a third-party original creditor and then transferred. --- ### § 1280 — Official Records **Summary.** A writing made as a record of an act, condition, or event by a public employee within the scope of the employee's duty is admissible as an exception to the hearsay rule if the sources of information and method of preparation indicate trustworthiness. ``` § 1280. Evidence of a writing made as a record of an act, condition, or event is not made inadmissible by the hearsay rule when offered to prove the act, condition, or event if: (a) The writing was made by and within the scope of duty of a public employee; (b) The writing was made at or near the time of the act, condition, or event; and (c) The sources of information and method and time of preparation were such as to indicate its trustworthiness. ``` --- ### §§ 1290–1295 — Former Testimony **Summary.** Testimony given at a former proceeding (trial, deposition, hearing) is admissible if the declarant is unavailable (§ 240) and the party against whom the former testimony is offered had the right and opportunity to cross-examine at the prior proceeding. --- ## Division 11 — Authentication (§§ 1400–1454) ### § 1400 — Authentication Requirement **Summary.** Authentication is a condition precedent to admissibility for any writing (and, by extension, recordings and electronic documents). Authentication means introducing evidence sufficient to support a finding that the writing is what the proponent claims. ``` § 1400. Authentication of a writing means (a) the introduction of evidence sufficient to sustain a finding that it is the writing that the proponent of the evidence claims it is, or (b) the establishment of such facts by any other means provided by law. ``` --- ### § 1401 — Authentication Required **Summary.** A writing is inadmissible unless it has been authenticated. No hearsay exception will make an unauthenticated document admissible. --- ### § 1410 — Methods of Authentication **Summary.** Authentication may be made by: (a) testimony by a person with personal knowledge (§ 1413); (b) comparison by trier of fact or expert witness (§ 1417); (c) authentication by distinctive characteristics (§ 1421); (d) reply doctrine (§ 1420); (e) official publications (§ 1452); or (f) certified copies of official records (§§ 1452–1454). --- ### § 1413 — Testimony of Witness with Personal Knowledge **Summary.** A writing may be authenticated by the testimony of a witness who saw the writing made or executed, or who has personal knowledge that the writing is what it purports to be. --- ### § 1420 — Reply Letter Doctrine **Summary.** A writing may be authenticated by evidence that it was received in response to a prior communication sent to the purported author. --- ### § 1421 — Distinctive Characteristics **Summary.** A writing may be authenticated by evidence that the writing has distinctive characteristics (letterhead, handwriting, internal references) whose appearance, contents, substance, internal patterns, or other distinctive characteristics, taken together with the circumstances, are sufficient to authenticate. --- ### § 1452 — Official Seals **Summary.** A writing certified by a public officer under an official seal is self-authenticating. --- ### § 1453 — Public Records — Certification **Summary.** An official record, or an entry therein, is authenticated when certified by the officer having legal custody of it, under the officer's official seal (if any). --- ### § 1454 — Foreign Official Records **Summary.** A foreign official record is authenticated by a certification by a consular officer. --- ## Division 12 — Secondary Evidence Rule (§§ 1500–1567) ### § 1500 — Secondary Evidence Rule (Replaces Common-Law Best Evidence Rule) **Summary.** California replaced the federal "best evidence rule" (FRE 1002) with the "secondary evidence rule." Under § 1500, the content of a writing may be proved by any relevant evidence, not just the original — unless an objection is made (§ 1521) or the court exercises its discretion to exclude secondary evidence (§ 1522). --- ### § 1521 — Secondary Evidence Rule — Primary Rule **Summary.** An original or certified copy of a writing is required to prove its content unless: (a) the original is lost or destroyed; (b) the original is not reasonably available; (c) the original is a public record; or (d) the writing is not closely related to a controlling issue. An opposing party may object to secondary evidence on the ground that the original is available. ``` § 1521. (a) The content of a writing may be proved by otherwise admissible secondary evidence. The court shall exclude secondary evidence of the content of writing if the court determines either of the following: (1) A genuine dispute exists concerning material terms of the writing and justice requires the exclusion. (2) Admission of the secondary evidence would be unfair. ``` --- ### § 1561 — Business Records — Custodian Declaration **Summary.** A custodian of records for a business may authenticate business records by a declaration that complies with § 1561, in lieu of live testimony. The declaration must: state the custodian's title and authority; describe the records; state that the records were made in the regular course of business; state the time the records were created; and state that the records are true and correct copies. This is the standard method for authenticating bank records, medical records, and account records in California civil cases. ``` § 1561. (a) As used in this section, "business" has the meaning provided in Section 1270. (b) A custodian of records or other qualified person may, in lieu of testifying in person, prepare an affidavit declaring all of the following: (1) The affiant is the duly authorized custodian of the records or other qualified witness and has authority to certify the records. (2) The copy is a true copy of all the records described in the subpoena duces tecum, notice to produce, or other request. (3) The records were prepared by the personnel of the business in the ordinary course of business at or near the time of the act, condition, or event. (4) The identity of the records. ``` **Practice note.** In consumer debt cases, the § 1561 custodian declaration is the standard vehicle to admit account statements, payment histories, and assignment documents. Defendants should scrutinize whether the declarant has personal knowledge of the records' preparation and whether records created by a predecessor creditor (before assignment) can be authenticated by the assignee's custodian. Cross-reference: § 1271 (business records hearsay exception). --- ## Cross-Reference Summary | Evid. Code Section | Topic | |---|---| | §§ 140, 210 | Definitions: evidence, relevant evidence | | § 240 | Unavailability of witness | | § 350–356 | Relevance and § 352 prejudice balancing | | §§ 500–600 | Burden of proof; presumptions | | §§ 700–795 | Witnesses and opinion testimony | | §§ 800–870 | Opinion testimony (lay and expert) | | §§ 900–970 | Privileges: attorney-client, spousal | | §§ 990–1028 | Privileges: physician-patient, psychotherapist | | §§ 1115–1128 | Mediation confidentiality | | §§ 1151–1155 | Remedial measures; offers to compromise | | §§ 1200–1230 | Hearsay rule; party admissions | | §§ 1250–1252 | State of mind exception | | §§ 1270–1280 | Business records; official records | | §§ 1290–1295 | Former testimony | | §§ 1400–1454 | Authentication of writings | | §§ 1500–1567 | Secondary evidence rule; § 1561 custodian declaration |