Penal Code §118. (a)& 125 provide that:

(a) Every person who, having taken an oath that he or she will testify...before any competent tribunal...willfully and contrary to the oath, states as true any material matter which he or she knows to be false...is guilty of perjury.

An unqualified statement of that which one does not know to be true is equivalent to a statement of that which one knows to be false.

Cabe v. Superior Court, (1998) 63 Cal.App.4th 732 ("In order to lawfully hold a person to answer on the charge of perjury under [California Penal Code] section 118, evidence must exist of a "willful statement, under oath, of any material matter which the witness knows to be false.")

in order for there to be a lawsuit in the first place, somebody involved somewhere along the line is not telling the whole truth. power of attorney.com

Breaking an oath to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth is perjury. wikipedia

the crime of perjury depends not only upon the clarity of the questioning itself, but also upon the knowledge and reasonable understanding of the testifier as to what is meant by the questioning, we hold that a defendant may be found guilty of perjury if a jury could find beyond a reasonable doubt from the evidence presented that the defendant knew what the question meant and gave knowingly untruthful and materially misleading answers in response. USA v. Dezarn

Chief Justice Burger emphasized that the perjury statute refers to what the witness "states," not to what he "implies."  source Bronson v US?

As the California Supreme Court has stated:

[W]hen ··· a witness' answers are literally true he may not be faulted for failing to volunteer more explicit information. Although such testimony may cause a misleading impression due to the failure of counsel to ask more specific questions, the witness' failure to volunteer testimony to avoid the misleading impression does not constitute perjury because the crucial element of falsity is not present in his testimony. Chein v. Shumsky 

Under California law, falsity element of the crime of perjury requires that a statement be literally false; misleading and nonresponsive testimony that is literally true cannot support a perjury conviction. Chein v. Shumsky, C.A.9 (Cal.)2004, 373 F.3d 978, certiorari denied 125 S.Ct. 415, 543 U.S. 956, 160 L.Ed.2d 318West's Ann.Cal.Penal Code § 118

shouselaw.com

California Criminal Jury Instruction Perjury 2640

Crime Victim Restitution Form Interogatories - CR 200

The Free Library.com/

No one should benefit from their own wrong.” Civil Code 3517

People v. Webb (1999) 74 Cal.App.4th 688 , 88 Cal.Rptr.2d 259

In re Robbins (1998) 18 Cal.4th 770 , 77 Cal.Rptr.2d 153; 959 P.2d 311