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.
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.