State of California. During divorce in Contra Costa County, husband, Jeffrey Elkins, was self-represented, whereas his wife, Marilyn Elkins, was represented. A local superior court rule and a trial scheduling order in the family law court provided that in dissolution trials, parties must present their case by means of written declarations. The testimony of witness under direct examination was not allowed except in "unusual circumstances", although upon request parties were permitted to cross-examine declarants. In addition, parties were required to establish in their pretrial declarations the admissibility of all exhibits they sought to introduce at trial

Self-represented husband did not establish in his pretrial declaration the admissibility of all of his exhibits. At trial, wife's attorney objected to all but two husband's exhibits. The trial judge excluded 34 out of 36 husband's exhibits and decided the case awarding wife what her attorney requested, thereby leaving husband with almost nothing.

Husband filed a Petition for Writ in the Court of Appeal, which was summarily denied with no reasons stated.

Husband's attorney filed a Petition for Review in the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court granted the Petition, reviewed the case, issued an opinion, reversed the Court of Appeal summary denial of husband's Petition for Writ, and instructed the Court of Appeal to issue a writ in terms consistent with the opinion of the Supreme Court.

Direct link:  http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/callawcs.pl?vol=41&reporter=Cal.4th&page=1337 

If this link does not open, copy and paste the address in a new window.