Prickett v. Bonnier Corp., No. G058575 (D4d3 Oct. 11, 2020)
In an admiralty case arising out of a filmshoot at sea—apparently these are a thing—plaintiff beat back a demurrer on her theory of liability. But then the judge retired. After a debatable change in case law, defendant filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings. The new judge granted it.
Plaintiff argues that the new judge shouldn’t have revisited the old judge’s ruling. And there is indeed some precedent that following a reassignment, the new judge should not revisit the first judge’s orders. But what happens on appeal if the second judge was right?
The Court of Appeal notes some “tension between the constitutional mandate to reverse only for miscarriage of justice and the need to conserve judicial resources by discouraging both judge shopping and repeatedly making the same motion.” But the former wins out here. As the second judge’s ruling was correct, there’s no prejudice, and thus no reversible error.
Affirmed.
No comments:
Post a Comment