What is a Motion for New Trial?

Useful Resources for Motion for New Trial

Rulings on Motion for New Trial

176-200 of 10000 results

ZENNEA FOSTER VS CITY OF LOS ANGELES ET AL

Plaintiff Zennea Foster’s Motion for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict, or for New Trial, is DENIED.

  • Hearing

    May 01, 2018

MIDWAY RENT A CAR, INC A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION VS BOG HIE JUNG, ET AL.

On December 10, 2019, Jung filed the instant Motion for New Trial (the “Motion”). The Motion consists of a single page, does not cite any authority, and requests that the court “re-open” the case to allow Jung to present her defense. (Mot., p. 1.) The Court notes that filing a Motion for New Trial is not the proper procedure.

  • Hearing

    Jan 28, 2020

YANZI LIN VS. KEVIN JOSHUA CASTELLANOS

Because of Plaintiff’s lack of evidentiary support at the time of trial, the Court will not set aside the judgment and damages awarded as a matter of law. Accordingly, the Court will deny the motion for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict. RULING: 1. Deny motion for new trial. 2. Deny motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict.

  • Hearing

    Jun 22, 2018

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Auto

HAHN V. LOUGHEED

motion is not entitled to bring a motion for reconsideration, because it is impossible for the party to provide a satisfactory explanation for failure to produce the new law, facts, or circumstances at an earlier time; the law presented in the motion for reconsideration is not new and all facts were in existence at the time the motion for trial preference was filed; plaintiff did not mislead or deceive defendant; the filing of a cross- complaint is not a new fact or circumstance warranting reconsideration;

  • Hearing

    May 16, 2019

OSF MEDICAL GROUP OF CALIFORNIA, INC., ET AL. V. JOHN D. MOLONEY, ESQ.

Nature of Proceedings: Motion Leave to Amend First Amended Comp./Motion Continue Trial & MSC Dates Motion of Plaintiff for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint; Motion of Defendant to Continue Trial and Mandatory Settlement Conference Dates RULING Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file a SAC is granted. Defendant’s motion for a brief continuance of the MSC and trial dates is granted as set forth herein.

  • Hearing

    Jul 19, 2016

KENNETH GILLIAM VS PASSAGES MALIBU PHP LLC ET AL

The Motion for New Trial is therefore DENIED.

  • Hearing

    Jun 14, 2018

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

CONSERVATORSHIP OF: DIANE MCCOY

Now before the Court is Conservatee’s motion for a new trial on Michalle’s petition for appointment of a temporary conservator of the Estate of Diane McCoy. A motion for new trial requests the trial court to reexamine one or more issues of fact or law after a trial and decision by the judge or jury. (Code Civ. Proc., § 657.)

  • Hearing

    Dec 09, 2020

XOCHITL SANCHEZ, ET AL. VS. JAZZLYN AYALA, ET AL.

Motion for New Trial Defendant Jazzlyn Rae Ayala’s motion for new trial on each of four specified grounds or, in the alternative, for remittitur is DENIED. As for defendant’s motion for new trial on the ground of juror misconduct, the motion is based on alleged concealed bias on voir dire. The Court finds the proffered evidence is insufficient to establish juror misconduct. It is undisputed that the subject juror is an acquaintance of Mr. Bixby’s paralegal.

  • Hearing

    Apr 18, 2018

FORD MOTOR TRANSMISSION CASES

However, the Court finds the motion for new trial was previously denied by operation of law. To the extent the Court retains authority to rule on the merits of the motion for new trial, the motion is DENIED. The right to move for a new trial is statutory, must be pursued in the manner provided for by statute, and is entirely within the control of the legislature. (Lancel v. Postlethwaite (1916) 172 Cal. 326, 329.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 15, 2020

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

DICKERSON VS. PERRY & PAPENHAUSEN INC [E-FILE]

In light of the similarity in the dispositive issue on Plaintiffs/Cross-Defendants William Dickerson and Paradiso in Terra, LLC's motion for new trial/partial new trial and motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, the court issues one ruling as to both motions. Plaintiffs/Cross-Defendants William Dickerson and Paradiso in Terra, LLC's motion for new trial/partial new trial is denied. Plaintiffs' motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict is denied. The court finds Ayyad v.

  • Hearing

    Apr 25, 2019

  • Type

    Complex

  • Sub Type

    Writ

HUA VS HANNA

On a motion for new trial, the trial court is charged with reviewing the record and weighing the evidence admitted at trial to determine whether the "jury clearly should have reached a different verdict or decision." Code of Civil Procedure § 657. "A new trial motion allows a judge to disbelieve witnesses, reweigh evidence and draw reasonable inferences contrary to that of the jury . . . ." Fountain Valley Chateau Blanc Homeowner's Assn. v. Department of Veterans Affairs (1998) 67 Cal.App.4th 743, 751. 3.

  • Hearing

    Jul 30, 2018

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

LUIS FRANCISCO TAPIAS VS. MAXIM CRANE WORKS LP

Cross-defendants Scandia Family Fun Centers, Inc. and Steve Baddley's ("Cross-Defendants") motion to continue trial is DENIED. Cross-Defendants argue that good cause exists to continue the February 1, 2016 trial, due to the fact that they recently retained new counsel in August 2015, who need additional time to learn the case and prepare for trial.

  • Hearing

    Oct 23, 2015

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

TOPALIAN V COLLINS

Defendants’ motion for new trial. Motion denied. This motion is untimely. A party intending to move for a new trial must file with the clerk and serve on each adverse party a notice of intention to move for a new trial after the decision is rendered and before the entry of judgment (CCP § 659(a)(1); see Collins v Sutter Mem.

  • Hearing

    Dec 14, 2020

CAROLINE KAUFMAN ET AL VS VICTORIA NATKIN GOODMAN

.: BC637578 Hearing Date: June 5, 2018 [TENTATIVE] order RE: Defendant’s MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL Defendant Victoria Natkin Goodman (“Defendant”) seeks to continue the final status conference, trial, and all trial related dates in this action. The FSC is currently set for June 6, 2018, and trial is set for June 18, 2018. This motion was properly served on Plaintiff’s counsel via overnight UPS courier. No opposition has been filed by Plaintiff.

  • Hearing

    Jun 05, 2018

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Auto

  • Judge Elaine Lu
  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

CALIBER MOTORS, INC. VS. O'KAIN

The Defendants’ motion seeks to set aside the judgment in this action and conduct a new trial. The court construes this motion as one seeking a new trial. A motion for new trial may be made under the provisions of Code Civ. Proc., §§ 656 to 663.2 and 914 in any California superior court. (Code Civ. Proc., § 655). A new trial is a re-examination of an issue of fact in the same court after a trial and decision by a jury, court, or referee. (Code Civ. Proc. § 656). Defendants’ motion is denied as untimely.

  • Hearing

    Jul 10, 2020

GARCIA V. GONZALES, ET AL.

Plaintiff has not shown any basis for new trial. Based upon this finding, the court denies Plaintiff’s motion for new trial and conditional additur. (Civ. Code, §§ 657, 662.5, subd. (b).) Defendant Syria Gonzalez shall give notice of the ruling.

  • Hearing

    Oct 04, 2019

MARIA PEREZ VS CAROLYN JEAN VOLKOFF

Trial was initially set for September 25, 2017. On September 1, 2017, pursuant to a stipulation of the parties, the Court continued the trial to January 23, 2018 and ordered that discovery and motion cut-off dates be based on the new trial date. On October 6, 2017, the Court continued the trial from January 23, 2018 to June 13, 2018. The October 6, 2017 minute order did not specify that discovery was extended with the continuance of the trial date.

  • Hearing

    May 09, 2018

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Auto

  • Judge Elaine Lu
  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

PAUL ARON VS WIB HOLDING, LLC, ET AL.,

Following Defendants’ appeal of the new trial ruling, the Court of Appeal reversed the new trial order and affirmed the original January 25, 2016 judgment for Defendant. Merits Defendants now move for an order entering judgment in accordance with the court of appeal opinion. Specifically, Defendants request that the court enter judgment finding that the new trial order was reversed, granting the anti-SLAPP motion and dismissing Plaintiff’s complaint. (Mot., Ex. 2 [Proposed Judgment]).

  • Hearing

    Oct 29, 2018

LA JOLLA BENEFITS ASSOCIATION LLC VS CITY OF SAN DIEGO

Because the Motion for New Trial is the proper remedy and has been granted, the Motion to Vacate the Judgment is denied. Counsel should be prepared to discuss a briefing schedule and hearing date.

  • Hearing

    Mar 01, 2018

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

LA JOLLA BENEFITS ASSOCIATION LLC VS CITY OF SAN DIEGO

Because the Motion for New Trial is the proper remedy and has been granted, the Motion to Vacate the Judgment is denied. Counsel should be prepared to discuss a briefing schedule and hearing date.

  • Hearing

    Mar 01, 2018

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

JONATHAN COLEMAN VS. HENRY LEE JENNINGS

Tentative Ruling The Court rules as follows on plaintiff's motion for new trial. A motion for new trial is entirely statutory. It can be granted only on one of the seven grounds set forth in Code of Civil Procedure section 657. Here, plaintiff moves for new trial on the grounds of inadequate damages (CCP section 657(5). In ruling on the merits of a motion for new trial, the Court starts with the basic premise of Article VI section 13 of the Constitution.

  • Hearing

    Dec 03, 2009

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Auto

LAUREN CAZDEN VS JEREMY JAMES ET AL

MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL AS TO ESPINOZA The principal statutory authority for new trial motions is CCP § 657. “The right to a new trial is purely statutory, and a motion for a new trial can be granted only on one of the grounds enumerated in the statute.” (Fomco, Inc. v. Joe Maggio, Inc. (1961) 55 Cal.2d 162, 166.) The grounds enumerated in CCP §657 include: 1.

  • Hearing

    Mar 22, 2017

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

JEWELL VS. BARCLAYS

When “a judgment is reversed and the action remanded for a new trial,” the plaintiff has three years within which to bring the action to trial. (Code Civ. Proc., § 583.320, subd. (a)(3).) This rule applies when the judgment was entered pursuant to a motion for summary judgment. (Southern Pacific Co. v. Seaboard Mills (1962) 207 Cal.App.2d 97, 104.)

  • Hearing

    Feb 23, 2017

KRISTIN HARRIS VS. VICTOR MANUEL OLIVA

Generally, in considering such a motion, the court is guided by these principles: "Upon a motion for new trial grounded on insufficiency of the evidence because the damages are inadequate, the court should first determine whether the damages are clearly inadequate and, if so, whether the case would be a proper one for granting a motion for new trial limited to damages. [Citation.]

  • Hearing

    Feb 06, 2017

TERRY V MEINZER VS. WAI CHONG

As is set forth below, the Motion for New Trial on the grounds of insufficiency of the evidence is granted, the JNOV is denied, and the Motion to Tax Costs is moot. Motion for New Trial - Standard In ruling on a motion for new trial, the court independently reweighs the evidence. (Valdez v. Diffenbaugh (1975) 51 Cal.App.3d 494, 512.) A new trial should be granted if the jury's verdict is against the weight of the evidence. (Ibid.)

  • Hearing

    Nov 30, 2011

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

  « first    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 400     last » 

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

Please wait a moment while we load this page.