CA · jury_instructions
CACI No. 4103
Duty of Confidentiality—Essential Factual Elements
[Name of plaintiff] claims that [he/she/ nonbinary pronoun/it] was harmed
by [name of defendant]’s breach of the fiduciary duty of confidentiality.
To establish this claim, [name of plaintiff] must prove all of the following:
1. That [name of defendant] was [name of plaintiff]’s
[agent/stockbroker/real estate agent/real estate broker/corporate
officer/partner/[insert other fiduciary relationship]];
2. That [name of defendant] had information relating to [name of
plaintiff] that [he/she/ nonbinary pronoun /it] knew or should have
known was confidential;
3. That [name of defendant] [insert one of the following:]
3. [used [name of plaintiff]’s confidential information for [his/her/
nonbinary pronoun /its] own benefit;]
3. [communicated [name of plaintiff]’s confidential information to
third parties;]
4. That [name of plaintiff] did not give informed consent to [name of
defendant]’s conduct;
5. That the confidential information was not a matter of general
knowledge;
6. That [name of plaintiff] was harmed; and
7. That [name of defendant]’s conduct was a substantial factor in
causing [name of plaintiff]’s harm.
New June 2006
Provenance
- Source
- courts.ca.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-08-20
- Edition
- caci-2025
- Content hash
a52b86a059f8d0dc131358ce7d54c4ab9690bf7af4b0bd566b9ba346c19bdf36
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.