IAR Systems v. Super. Ct.

(California Court of Appeal) – In an action seeking a writ of mandate ordering the trial court to vacate its finding that a law firm should be deemed part of the ‘prosecution team’ prosecuting defendant/real party in interest for embezzlement, and granting defendant’s motion ordering the law firm to disclose material, exculpatory evidence in its possession in accordance with Brady v. Maryland (1963) 373 U.S. 83, the relief is granted where the trial court erred in: 1) imposing a duty under Brady to disclose material, exculpatory evidence directly on the law firm, as opposed to on the prosecution; and 2) in finding the law firm to be part of the prosecution team.