Motion Types Legal Issues

What is a Motion for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict?

Most Useful Motion for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict Examples

Recent Examples of Motion for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict

1-25 of 427 results

LINEA POLK VS DAVID GERRITY

...RULING: Plaintiffs’ motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict is denied. Defendant’s motion to tax plaintiffs’ cost memorandum in the amount of $5,424.98 is granted. In all other respects, defendant’s motion to tax plaintiffs’ costs is denied. Plaintiffs’ motion for attorney’s fees is granted. Plaintiffs are awarded attorney’s fees in the amount of $225,000. Plaintiffs’ request for expert witness fees pur...

... motion to strike or, in the alternative, to tax plaintiffs’ cost bill. ANALYSIS: Plaintiffs’ Motion for Judgment Notwithstanding Verdict Plaintiffs move for an order for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or, in the alternative, a remittitur reducing the jury’s award of $10,000.00 to defendant on the ground that there was no evidence to support defendant’s property damage claim. Defendant opposes the m...

  • Hearing

    Feb 19, 2020

WHITE, KIT VS CHING, M ROBERT, MD ET AL

... judgment, the motion is granted. Defendants shall make an up-front payment of $1,499,340.98, which includes the lump sum calculations submitted by Plaintiffs, and prejudgment interest of $74,970.48. Post-judgment interest shall not accrue on the prejudgment interest. Periodic payments are ordered on the gross value of the remaining Judgment, which the Court calculates to be $1,572,255.80. Said periodic payment...

...prepare a periodic payment Judgment consistent with the Court's ruling. Defendants' motion for partial judgment notwithstanding the verdict is denied as moot. On Defendants' motion for new trial, the motion is denied on the grounds that the Court finds there was no error in giving jury instruction CACI No. 518. Assuming arguendo that there was error, such error was harmless in that there was no resulting...

  • Hearing

    Feb 19, 2020

ESPOSITO VS WESTFIELD CORPORATION

The motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict ("JNOV") or new trial, filed by plaintiffs Amel and Kaelah Esposito, is denied. Preliminary Matters Defendant's hearsay objections to the declarations of Garrett McLearen and Peter Canales are susta...

...special verdict stating that ABM was not negligent. ROA # 327. Judgment was entered on December 24, 2019. ROA # 328. Discussion 1. JNOV A motion for JNOV must be granted "whenever a motion for a directed verdict for the aggrieved party should have been granted had a previous motion been made." Code Civ. Proc., § 629. Granting a JNOV is only proper when "there is no evidence of sufficient substantiality to sup...

  • Hearing

    Feb 13, 2020

DRAKE KENNEDY, ET AL. VS BRIAN KENNEDY, ET AL.

...22, 2020 PROOF OF SERVICE: OK PROCEEDING: Defendant and Cross-Complainant’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings OPPOSITION: January 23, 2020 REPLY: January 29, 2020 TENTATIVE: Brian’s motion for judgment on the pleadings is GRANTED. Brian is to give notice. This case arises out of a dispute between two brothers, Brian and Drake Kennedy,[1] who are the directors, officers, and shareholders or board me...

...provided by statute, the rules governing demurrers govern motions for judgment on the pleadings. (Cloud v. Northrup Grumman Corp. (1998) 67 Cal.App.4th 995, 999.) Therefore, the grounds for a motion for judgment on the pleadings must be apparent from either the face of the complaint or a matter of which the court may take judicial notice. (Ibid.) The court accepts the truth of all material facts properly plea...

  • Hearing

    Feb 5, 2020

JAMES BULLER VS. HENSEL PHELPS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY

The motion for new trial or, in the alternative, motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, filed by plaintiff James Buller, is denied. Preliminary Matters Defendant's unopposed request for judicial notice is granted. Discussion The Court's power to rule on a motion for a new trial exp...

...of judgment. ROA # 206.) The judgment was entered on December 23. ROA ## 291, 220. Because no copy for conforming was provided, no notice of entry of judgment was given. Thus, the time to rule on the motion expired 75 days after the filing of the first notice of intention to move for a new trial. Plaintiff filed his first notice of intent on November 14. ROA # 215. Thus, the Court's jurisdiction to rule ...

  • Hearing

    Jan 30, 2020

AMAYA VS KELLY

MOTION FOR JUDGMENT NOTWITHSTANDING THE VERDICT, ADDITUR OR ALTERNATIVELY, NEW TRIAL by plaintiff Cheryl Amaya is DENIED.

  • Hearing

    Jan 30, 2020

ENCORE LEASING GROUP LLC VS. THE MAINE WOOD TREATERS INC

...correct the Minute Order dated October 30, 2019 (ROA 139). (C.C.P., § 473(d). The Court recalls that after a conference with counsel and clarification from the jury, the answer to the Complaint's Special Verdict Form, at Question No. 9 ["Did Encore Leasing Group, LLC know that The Maine Wood Treaters, Inc. was mistaken and use that mistake to take advantage of The Maine Wood Treaters, Inc.?"] was "No." The Co...

...139) to so reflect. JNOV Defendant's motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict is denied. In essence, a motion for JNOV is a "challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence to support the jury's verdict[.]" (Stubblefield Construction Co. v. City of San Bernardino (1995) 32 Cal.App.4th 687, 703.) This challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence may prevail only if "it appears from the evidence, viewe...

  • Hearing

    Jan 23, 2020

THOMAS JAMES VS LEAVITT GROUP AGENCY OF SAN DIEGO INC

Defendant's Motion for New Trial is DENIED. Defendant's Motion for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict is DENIED. The Court grants Plaintiff's CCP 473 Motion and has considered the Oppositions. However, based on the briefing, the parties agree that the special verdict from the jury exceeded the damages...

  • Hearing

    Jan 22, 2020

THOMAS JAMES VS LEAVITT GROUP AGENCY OF SAN DIEGO INC

Defendant's Motion for New Trial is DENIED. Defendant's Motion for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict is DENIED. The Court grants Plaintiff's CCP 473 Motion and has considered the Oppositions. However, based on the briefing, the parties agree that the special verdict from the jury exceeded the damages...

  • Hearing

    Jan 22, 2020

STEVE SNOECK VS EXAKTIME INNOVATIONS INC

SUBJECT: Motion to Tax Costs Moving Party: Defendant ExakTime Innovations, Inc. Resp. Party: Plaintiff Steve Snoeck The Court GRANTS in part Defendant’s motion to tax. The Court taxes the total costs by $30,056.44, and grants costs in the amount of $49,353.46. BACKGROUND: Plaintiff Steve Snoeck commenced this action on June 6, 2018 against Defendant ExakTi...

...Executive after he took an approved medical leave for his disability of sleep apnea, high blood pressure, and hypothyroidism. (Complaint, ¶¶ 8-15.) On May 30, 2019, the Court denied Defendant’s for summary judgment, or in the alternative, summary adjudication. A jury trial took place on June 17, 2019, June 18, 2019, June 19, 2019, June 20, 2019, June 24, 2019, and June 25, 2019. The jury found in favor of Defe...

  • Hearing

    Jan 21, 2020

MICHAEL HAZARD VS BURBANK AUTO PARTS ET AL

Hazard v Burbank Auto Parts Motion for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict; Motion for New Trial Calendar: 09 Case No.: BC629772 Hearing Date: January 17, 2020 Action Filed: August 05, 2016 Judgment: November 26, 2019 MP: Defendants Vehicle Effects, Inc.; and Dennis...

... motions on January 02, 2020, with reply briefs filed on January 07, 2020. RELIEF REQUESTED: Defendant Vehicle Effects, Inc. moves for new trial. Defendants Vehicle Effects, Inc. moves for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. DISCUSSION: Standard of Review – New Trial – Code of Civil Procedure §657 sets forth the relief available on a motion for new trial, as well as the causes upon which such a motion may b...

  • Hearing

    Jan 17, 2020

STANLEY VINCENT VS THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ET AL

...trial and motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. The court granted, in part, CHP’s motion to tax costs, reducing claimed costs to $71,842.88. On November 1, CHP filed its notice of appeal. Motion: Vincent now moves pursuant Gov’t Code § 12965(b) for attorney fees in the amount of $2,982,360, which includes a 2x multiplier; and for expert fees in the amount of $54,278.54. CHP opposes the motion ...

...Analysis: The court knows this case well. It commenced over three years ago. There were considerable law and motion matters, including a comprehensive summary judgment/adjudication motion. There were 16 motions in limine. The jury trial lasted 11 days. It was a difficult case for the plaintiff. Because CHP offered a legitimate reason for its actions with substantial documentation, Vincent had a substantial ...

  • Hearing

    Jan 17, 2020

GLORIA GUZMAN VS HOOMAN ENTERPRISES INC

...Party: Defendant NBA Automotive, Inc. d/b/a Hooman Chevrolet of Culver City Responding Party: Plaintiff Gloria Guzman Defendant’s motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict is DENIED. Defendant’s motion for new trial is DENIED. BACKGROUND: Plaintiff Gloria Guzman commenced this action on September 14, 2017 and filed her first amended complaint (“FAC”) the next day on September 15, 2017 against Defe...

...December 6, 2019. ANALYSIS: I. Motion for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict A. Legal Standard The party against whom a verdict has been rendered may move the court for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, and the court shall grant the motion “whenever a motion for directed verdict for the aggrieved party should have been granted had a previous motion been made.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 629, subd. (a).) Th...

  • Hearing

    Jan 6, 2020

GLORIA GUZMAN VS HOOMAN ENTERPRISES INC

...Party: Defendant NBA Automotive, Inc. d/b/a Hooman Chevrolet of Culver City Responding Party: Plaintiff Gloria Guzman Defendant’s motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict is DENIED. Defendant’s motion for new trial is DENIED. BACKGROUND: Plaintiff Gloria Guzman commenced this action on September 14, 2017 and filed her first amended complaint (“FAC”) the next day on September 15, 2017 against Defe...

...December 6, 2019. ANALYSIS: I. Motion for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict A. Legal Standard The party against whom a verdict has been rendered may move the court for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, and the court shall grant the motion “whenever a motion for directed verdict for the aggrieved party should have been granted had a previous motion been made.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 629, subd. (a).) Th...

  • Hearing

    Jan 6, 2020

VITEC ELECTRONICS CORP. VS. VERIS INDUSTRIES, LLC

...IN PART as set forth below. The Court denies Defendants’ motion for attorney’s fees insofar as it is based on California’s Uniform Trade Secrets Act, Civil Code § 3426 et seq. The Court continues the motion for supplemental briefing regarding Oregon law pertaining to the recovery of contractual attorney’s fees. Each party shall be permitted to file one supplemental brief, not longer than 8 pages, by Janu...

...at 9:00 a.m. in Department CX104. Grounds for Ruling After a jury entered a verdict in Plaintiff’s favor in this trade secret dispute, Defendants prevailed on a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. Defendants now seek their attorney’s fees under both the California Uniform Trade Secrets Act (“UTSA”) and a 2006 non-disclosure agreement (the “2006 NDA”). They also seek to recover their expert fee...

  • Hearing

    Jan 3, 2020

NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC VS PARK

...Sean Park and Michelle Park's motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict is DENIED. Defendant have not shown that the evidence received at trial is insufficient as a matter of law to support the verdict. Contrary to defendants' assertions, Aurora Loan Services did not conduct the foreclosure sale. The original Deed of Trust identifies Lehman Brothers as the Lender. MERS is identified as the Benefici...

  • Hearing

    Dec 19, 2019

NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC VS PARK

...Sean Park and Michelle Park's motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict is DENIED. Defendant have not shown that the evidence received at trial is insufficient as a matter of law to support the verdict. Contrary to defendants' assertions, Aurora Loan Services did not conduct the foreclosure sale. The original Deed of Trust identifies Lehman Brothers as the Lender. MERS is identified as the Benefici...

  • Hearing

    Dec 19, 2019

NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC VS PARK

...Sean Park and Michelle Park's motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict is DENIED. Defendant have not shown that the evidence received at trial is insufficient as a matter of law to support the verdict. Contrary to defendants' assertions, Aurora Loan Services did not conduct the foreclosure sale. The original Deed of Trust identifies Lehman Brothers as the Lender. MERS is identified as the Benefici...

  • Hearing

    Dec 19, 2019

ELIZABETH CHRISTINE ELIAS VS MARIA DE AL PALOMA PEREZ CLARK

My-Phuong Pham, et al. v. Ben Bolton, et al. MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION MOVING PARTY: Defendant and Cross-Complainant Ben Bolton RESPONDING PARTY(S): Plaintiffs and Cross-Defendants My-Phoung Pham, John Skyler Owens, and Suzannah J. Owens STATE...

...nuisance, and intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress. Defendant/Cross-Complainant Ben Bolton moves for summary adjudication. TENTATIVE RULING: Defendant/Cross-Complainant Ben Bolton’s motion for summary adjudication is DENIED. DISCUSSION: Late Opposition Plaintiffs’ opposition to Defendant’s motion was untimely. However, on December 9, 2019, the Court granted Plaintiffs’ ex parte appli...

  • Hearing

    Dec 13, 2019

UMINA V. LUMINA

...that judgment was issued and filed on September 2, 2010. On October 28, 2010 the court denied the plaintiff’s motion for new trial. On October 28, 2010 the court also denied defendant Leonard Umina’s motion for a new trial on the trial court’s 2007 interlocutory judgment that found the LMMK Trust was not valid and on the unjust enrichment cause of action that was tried to a jury and special verdict enter...

...entered on April 24, 2008. The court further denied Leonard Umina’s motions for new trial, to stay execution of judgment, for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, and to vacate judgment and enter different judgment. On October 28, 2010 Leonard Umina filed a notice of appeal. On May 28, 2014 the Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the judgment against defendant Leonard Umina. On June 17, 2014 defendant’s peti...

  • Hearing

    Dec 6, 2019

FOXCROFT PRODUCTIONS INC ET AL VS UNIVERSAL CITY STUDIOS LLC

HEARING DATE: December 2, 2019 CASE NAME: Foxcroft Productions Inc., et al. v. Universal City Studios, LLC, et al. CASE NO.: BC683206 TRIAL DATE: Judgment entered October 31, 2019, Notice of Entry of Judgment sent October 31, 2019 NOTICE: OK SUBJECT: Motion for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict or For New Trial MOVING PARTY: Defendant, Universal C...

...Productions, Inc. Universal’s Motion for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict and Motion for a New Trial are DENIED as to the statute of limitations. Universal’s motion to vacate the court’s bench trial judgment is also DENIED. The court will entertain argument on the other issues prior to making final rulings. Plaintiffs are to give notice. This action arises from allegations that Universal City Studios, LL...

  • Hearing

    Dec 2, 2019

LUPE POWELL VS LUCIE IDLEMAN ET AL

HEARING DATE: November 20, 2019 CASE NAME: Lupe Powell v. Lucie Idleman, et al. CASE NO.: BC626424 TRIAL DATE: Judgment entered 9/23/19, Notice of Entry of Judgment sent 9/24/19 NOTICE: OK SUBJECT: Motion for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant Lupe Powell OPPOSING PARTY: Defendant and Cross-Complainant Jonathan Christ...

...for New Trial MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant Lupe Powell OPPOSING PARTY: Defendant and Cross-Complainant Jonathan Christodoro Plaintiff’s Motion for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict and Motion for a New Trial are DENIED. Defendant is to give notice. This breach of contract action arises out of a contract under which Plaintiff, Lupe Powell (“Plaintiff”) alleged she was to loan money and pro...

  • Hearing

    Nov 20, 2019

STEVE SANSEN VS. AEROJET ROCKETDYNE, INC.

...Rocketdyne, Inc. ("Defendant") for reconsideration of the court's October 18, 2019, order granting Plaintiff Steven Sansen's ("Plaintiff") Motion for New Trial. The court lacks jurisdiction to now hear the Motion for Reconsideration. Background On July 23, 2019, the jury returned a verdict in favor of Defendant on all causes of action. Notice of entry of judgment was served on Plaintiff August 6, 201...

...new trial and judgment notwithstanding the verdict. On October 18, 2019, the court granted Plaintiff's motion for new trial on the grounds of jury misconduct. On October 21, 2019, Defendant filed this Motion for Reconsideration. This motion was originally set for hearing November 22, 2019. On November 1, 2019, the court issued a minute order bifurcating this motion into two phases: (1) whether t...

  • Hearing

    Nov 20, 2019

MOLOCO CAPITAL PARTNERS VSI DONALD B. BIBEAULT, ET AL

...SECTION 657 [PLTF] MOLOCO CAPITAL PARTNERS 2) NOTICE OF MOTION — FOR JUDGMENT NOTWITHSTANDING THE VERDICT [DEFT] DONALD B. BIBEAULT [DEFT] HENRY RAOUL FISHER RULING Plaintiffs Motion for Modification of Verdict Under Code of Civil Procedure § 657 is denied. As the jury declined to award interest on the damages it awarded, it may have taken into account the Defendants assertions that they didn’t owe the money...

...was entered against the Defendants Defendants Donald B, Bibeault and Henry R. Fisher’s Motion for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict is denied. There was substantial evidence to support the jury’s verdict in favor of the Plaintiff The jury obviously believed the witness on behalf of the Plaintiff and decided accordingly The court will not substitute its own weighing of the evidence for that of the jury...

  • Hearing

    Nov 13, 2019

LORRAINE WILLIAMS VS BURLINGTON CONVALESCENT HOSPITAL INC ET

... Verdict TENTATIVE RULING Motion for New Trial is DENIED. Motion for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict is DENIED. DISCUSSION Both the motion for new trial and the motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict are based upon the same three arguments: (1) the award for future pain and suffering was unsupported by any testimony from Plaintiff as to how Williams’s symptoms described at the time of trial were c...

...testimony at trial and no expert witness testimony was required. JNOV The motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict is based upon CCP §629. A party is entitled to a judgment notwithstanding the verdict where “there is no evidence of sufficient substantiality to support the jury’s verdict.” A judge’s discretion in granting a JNOV is much more limited than a judge’s discretion in granting a motion for...

  • Hearing

    Nov 7, 2019

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 18     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.