Can anything said between opposing parties in regards to discussing settlement negotiations be used against them?

Confidentiality of settlement discussions is not as absolute as many believe: From https://www.dailyjournal.com/cle.cfm?show=CLEDisplayArticle&qVersionID=299&eid=905828&evid=1 Lawyers routinely send and receive settlement communications marked "Privileged and Confidential Pursuant to CA Evidence Code §§ 1152 and 1154." They are often certain that what is said in settlement discussions cannot be discovered later on in the litigation or in another case. But in fact the two sections cited do not make anything privileged or confidential. They simply make settlement communications inadmissible to prove or dispute liability for the claim being negotiated. Settlement communications are often discoverable and admitted into evidence for purposes other than to buttress or attack liability for a given claim. Settlement communications may also become admissible when a person's conduct during the negotiations is relevant in a subsequent proceeding. In bad faith litigation, judges routinely rule that the language of Evidence Code section 1152 "does not preclude the introduction of settlement negotiations if offered not to prove liability for the original loss but to prove failure to process the claim fairly and in good faith." [cites omitted] ... If an opponent makes improper threats during settlement negotiations; refuses reasonable settlement offers; or seeks to recover attorneys fees for time spent that did not improve the settlement, it makes sense to use the settlement discussions. Indeed, in that situation such discussions would appear to be highly relevant and admissible under the authority cited above. In cases involving insurance companies and other entities bound by a legally enforceable duty to negotiate in good faith, plaintiffs counsel may want to use evidence from settlement discussions to demonstrate either bad faith or a breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing[cite omitted]. Insurance companies may use settlement discussions to demonstrate good faith and defeat bad faith actions. Prudent lawyers may execute a written confidentiality agreement at the outset of a dialogue on settlement. If such an agreement is in place, then any subsequent disclosure in violation of stipulated terms provides a basis to argue for damages and specific performance—not to mention for a claim that the other party has waived any right to rely on the evidence in question. Moreover, a breach of the confidentiality agreement may move the court to award sanctions under Code of Civil Procedure section 128.7, as well as to award reasonable expenses under section 128.6. Christine McCall, License Advocates Law Group www.LicenseAdvocates.com www.CaliforniaLicenseLaw.com

Without seeing your email communications it’s hard to give a response although I do agree with Ms. McCall. It would appear that the attorney could notice your deposition and ask you the questions under oath that would make you produce the same answers and also put you on the stand during the trial and have you testify in regard to your statements. The general rule is that negotiations are not considered as evidentiary. _________________________________