Employee's Declaration Executed Out Of State Did Not Substantially Comply With California Law
Kulshrestha v. First Union Commercial Corp., 33 Cal. App. 4th 601 (2003)
Dheeraj Kulshrestha sued First Union for wrongful termination, promissory fraud, and discrimination, among other things. In response to First Union's motion for summary judgment, Kulshrestha filed a declaration that he executed in Columbus, Ohio but that did not state that it was signed “under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California” as required by the Code of Civil Procedure. The trial court sustained First Union's objection to the declaration and granted summary judgment in its favor. The Court of Appeal affirmed summary judgment, holding that since the declaration Kulshrestha filed failed to subject him to criminal penalties under California's perjury law, it was not in “substantial compliance” with the law's requirements.
