Evidentiary objections to declarations in California draw on the same grounds you would use against live testimony at trial: lack of personal knowledge, no foundation, hearsay, improper opinion, legal conclusions, failure to authenticate, irrelevance, and undue prejudice under Evidence Code section 352. In summary judgment practice they must be filed in writing, in the specific format required by California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1354, and served with your opposition or reply. Unchallenged statements in a declaration are treated as admissible evidence, so choosing the right grounds and raising them the right way is often what decides a contested motion.
The Grounds You Can Object On
Personal Knowledge and Foundation
Every statement in a declaration must rest on the declarant’s firsthand knowledge. Evidence Code section 702 makes testimony inadmissible unless the witness has personal knowledge of the matter, and that knowledge must be shown before the testimony comes in.1California Legislative Information. California Code EVID 702 – Competency This objection is sustained constantly because declarants routinely recount things they were told rather than things they witnessed.
A foundation objection targets a related but distinct problem: the declarant may know the fact but never explains how. If someone attaches an email and describes what it says without explaining how they know the sender or recognize the account, foundation is missing. Under Evidence Code section 403, the party offering the evidence must produce enough foundational facts to support a finding that the preliminary conditions for admissibility are met.2California Legislative Information. California Code EVID 403 – Determination of Foundational and Other Preliminary Facts If the declaration skips that step, object.
Hearsay
Hearsay is an out-of-court statement offered to prove what it asserts, and Evidence Code section 1200 excludes it unless a statutory exception applies.3California Legislative Information. California Code EVID 1200 – Hearsay Evidence Declarations are especially prone to hearsay problems because the declarant is writing a narrative rather than answering questions, so other people’s statements slip in naturally.
Watch for two things. First, a statement offered for something other than its truth (its effect on the listener, or the declarant’s state of mind) is not hearsay, and a savvy proponent will reframe purpose to dodge the objection. Second, declarations often contain layered hearsay, where the declarant repeats a statement that itself quotes someone else. Each layer needs its own exception, and proponents commonly address one and forget the other.
The burden of establishing an exception falls on the party offering the declaration. Two exceptions come up constantly:
- Business records under Evidence Code section 1271. The record must have been created in the regular course of business, made at or near the time of the event, and introduced by a custodian or qualified witness who explains how it was prepared and why the method is trustworthy. The common failure is a declarant who attaches records without being the custodian and without walking through the record-keeping system. A bare label of “business records” does not satisfy the statute.4California Legislative Information. California Code Evidence Code 1271 – Business Records
- Party admissions under Evidence Code section 1220. A statement by a party, offered against that party, is not excluded by the hearsay rule regardless of the capacity in which it was made. But the exception only works when the statement is offered against the person who made it. A declarant quoting a co-party’s statement in support of their own position cannot use this exception.5California Legislative Information. California Code EVID 1220 – Admissions
Other exceptions exist for spontaneous statements, prior inconsistent statements, and official records. The question in every case is the same: did the proponent lay the specific foundation the exception requires? If the declaration does not walk through the elements, the objection should be sustained.
Improper Opinion and Legal Conclusions
Declarations should stick to facts. When a lay declarant offers an opinion, Evidence Code section 800 limits it to opinions based on the declarant’s own perception that help clarify their testimony.6California Legislative Information. California Code EVID 800 – Lay Opinion Testimony “The car was going fast” is fine. “He intended to breach the contract” or “she acted negligently” is not.
Expert declarations face the requirements of Evidence Code section 801. The opinion must concern a subject beyond common experience and rest on information experts in the field reasonably rely on.7California Legislative Information. California Code EVID 801 – Opinion Testimony by Expert Witnesses Object when the declaration fails to establish qualifications, does not identify the information relied on, or offers conclusions on matters that need no specialized knowledge.
Separate from the opinion rules, declarations should not contain naked legal conclusions. “The defendant violated the statute” or “the contract is unenforceable” are conclusions for the court, not facts for a witness. Courts routinely sustain these objections whether the declarant is a lay witness or an expert.
Authentication of Attached Documents
Declarations almost always come with exhibits, and every exhibit needs authentication. Evidence Code section 1401 requires authentication before a writing can be received into evidence or considered as secondary evidence of its content.8California Legislative Information. California Code Evidence Code 1401 – Authentication Requirement Authentication means enough evidence to support a finding that the document is what the proponent claims it is.9California Legislative Information. California Code EVID 1400 – Authentication Defined
Simply attaching a document and referring to it in the declaration is not authentication. For a contract, the declarant should state they personally signed it and recognize the other signature. For an email, the declarant should explain how they know the sender’s address, that it came through a regularly used account, and that the attached copy is a true and correct reproduction. When that language is missing, the exhibit is objectionable, and this is one of the most common mistakes in declarations.
Relevance and Section 352
Only relevant evidence is admissible.10California Legislative Information. California Code Evidence Code 350 – Admissibility of Evidence Evidence Code section 210 defines relevance broadly as any tendency in reason to prove or disprove a disputed fact of consequence, but declarations sometimes carry background narrative or character material with no connection to the legal issues the motion raises. Object when a statement does not touch any disputed fact before the court.
Even relevant evidence can be excluded under Evidence Code section 352 when its probative value is substantially outweighed by the risk of undue prejudice, confusion of issues, or misleading the trier of fact.11California Legislative Information. California Code Evidence Code 352 – Discretion of Court to Exclude Evidence In declarations, this objection targets inflammatory characterizations, speculation dressed up as fact, and long irrelevant narratives that bury the point. Courts have broad discretion here, and a focused section 352 objection can strip out the most damaging portions of a declaration that is otherwise admissible.
How to File Written Objections
For summary judgment and summary adjudication motions, the procedure is set by California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1354, and it demands precision. Each objection must be numbered consecutively, identify the document by name, give the exhibit, title, page, and line number of the challenged material, quote the objectionable statement, and state the legal grounds for exclusion.12Judicial Branch of California. California Rules of Court Rule 3.1354 – Written Objections to Evidence Vague objections that fail to pinpoint the exact language or cite a specific Evidence Code section are routinely ignored.
File the objections as a separate document from the opposition or reply papers. Reference them by number in the right column of your separate statement, but do not restate the argument there. Timing is strict: unless the court excuses it for good cause, objections must be served and filed at the same time as the opposition or reply.12Judicial Branch of California. California Rules of Court Rule 3.1354 – Written Objections to Evidence
Rule 3.1354(c) also requires a proposed order alongside the objections. The proposed order must list each piece of objectionable material, state the grounds, and include spaces for the court to mark each objection as sustained or overruled, plus a signature line for the judge.12Judicial Branch of California. California Rules of Court Rule 3.1354 – Written Objections to Evidence Some courts require an electronic version. Forgetting the proposed order can result in the court declining to consider your objections at all.
Rule 3.1354 applies specifically to summary judgment and summary adjudication. For other motions, California has no equally rigid procedural rule. Most attorneys follow a similar format and file written objections with their opposition or reply, but the precise requirements depend on local rules and the judge’s preferences. Check them.
Waiver and What Happens If the Court Does Not Rule
Failing to raise objections at the right time can waive them entirely. Code of Civil Procedure section 437c(d) provides that an objection based on a declaration’s failure to meet the summary judgment admissibility standards is waived if not made at the hearing, and section 437c(b)(5) similarly deems evidentiary objections waived if not made at the hearing.13California Legislative Information. California Code of Civil Procedure 437c Written objections filed before the hearing satisfy this requirement, so you do not need to repeat them orally.
When the court does not rule on your objections, section 437c(q) provides that the court only needs to rule on objections it considers material to its decision. Any objections the court does not rule on are automatically preserved for appeal.13California Legislative Information. California Code of Civil Procedure 437c Silence operates as an implied overruling, but the appellate argument survives.
When the Declaration Itself Is Defective
Before parsing individual statements, look at the declaration as a whole. Under Code of Civil Procedure section 2015.5, a declaration substitutes for a sworn affidavit only if the declarant signs under penalty of perjury and includes the date and place of execution when signed within California, or the date and a statement that it is declared under the laws of California when signed elsewhere.14California Legislative Information. California Code of Civil Procedure 2015.5 A declaration missing any of these elements is defective on its face, and you can object to the whole document rather than picking apart individual statements.
Declarations filed for or against summary judgment carry an added statutory requirement: they must be based on personal knowledge, contain only admissible evidence, and affirmatively show that the declarant is competent to testify to the facts stated.13California Legislative Information. California Code of Civil Procedure 437c The competence has to appear inside the declaration; a judge will not assume it.
Choosing Which Objections to Actually Raise
Filing a wall of objections to every sentence is tempting and counterproductive. Judges notice when a party objects to clearly admissible material, and it dilutes the credibility of the objections that matter. Focus on statements that, if excluded, would change the outcome. If a particular hearsay statement is the only support for an element of the opposing party’s case, that objection deserves your best work.
Be precise about the ground. “Hearsay” alone is weaker than “Hearsay under Evidence Code section 1200, subdivision (b), no applicable exception established.” If the proponent invokes an exception, identify the specific foundational element they failed to establish. Objections that make the judge’s job easier get sustained more often than objections that make the judge do the work.