Sandoval v. Qualcomm, Inc., No. D070431 (D4d1 Oct. 19, 2018)
This is an appeal and cross appeal of post-judgment motions in a multi-defendant personal injury case. The trial court denied a JNOV, but grated a new trial on the ground that the jury messed up comparative fault allocation. In granting the new trial, it relied on Code of Civil Procedure § 657(5), which permits a new trial based on excessive or inadequate damages.
The JNOV is as easy affirm. There was substantial evidence, enough to get to a jury, which is all a JNOV addresses.
On the new trial, right result, wrong provision. While comparative fault deals with damages in a sense, § 657(5) is addressed to the overall damages award, not its allocation between defendants. Regardless, the code nonetheless permitted the trial court to grant a new trial on comparative fault under § 657(6), which addresses the insufficiency of the evidence to justify a verdict. And since there was substantial evidence to support the trial court's decision in its capacity as an independent evaluator of the facts, that would be upheld.
Affirmed.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
We've Moved ....
After a two-year hiatus, 111 North Hill Street has decided to decamp for Substack. Thank you for your readership over the last twelve year...
-
Soto v. Borgwarner Morse Tec Inc. , No. B252995 (D2d4, as modified August 20, 2015) Although some law-and-economics attuned federal judges...
-
The Rossdale Grp. v. Walton , No. H043476 (D6 Apr. 15, 2017) This is a weird and kind of narrow opinion about standing that is mostly shap...
No comments:
Post a Comment