On March 06, 2019 a
Motion-Secondary
was filed
involving a dispute between
Hyle, John,
and
Aguilar, Elia M,
Rodriguez, Arianna Athena,
Rodriguez, Arianne Athena,
Rodriguez, David J,
for PI Motor Vehicle
in the District Court of San Bernardino County.
Preview
RIZIO LIPINKSY LAW FIRM PC
Lauren M. Vogt, Bar No. 326300 SUPERIQRFCA L ED
lvogt(a)riziolawfirm.com CgAUNNgggF (5J2;
gERCn/I‘A‘ggsgm
2677 North Main Street, Ste 225 WDWO onsmm
Santa Ana, CA 92705
JAN 2 3 2024
WW
Phone: (714)505-2468
Facsimile: (714)547-1245
NOWQOMAri—t
Puneet Toor
Bar No. 289893
x 5mm av
245 Fischer Ave. Suite Dl
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Phone: (888) 861-8667 Facsimile: (888) 861-8667
Attorneys for Plaintifi‘, JOHN HYLE
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE 0F CALIFORNIA
V
‘
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO «(,0
YEA 13' ?\I
JOHN HYLE, CASE NO.: CIVDSI907037
Plaintiff, [Hon. Thomas S. Garza, Dept. 827]
v. MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND
AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF
ARIANNA ATHENA RODRIGUEZ; DAVID MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL;
NNNNNNNNNu—ap—nu—IHH—‘H—nb-H
J. RODRIGUZ; ELIA M. AGUILAR; and
DECLARATION 0F LAUREN M. VOGT
DOES through 100, inclusive,
IN SUPPORT THEREOF
1
Date: 2/26/24
O°\)O\M&WNHO\OOOVQM&WNHO
Defendants.
Time: 8:30 A.M.
Dept: 827
Complaint Filed: March 6, 2019
Trial Date: October 23, 2023
INTRODUCTION
In this matter Plaintiff, John Hylc sought personal injury damages arising from an
automobile accident that occurred on March 22, 201 7 in which he was a passenger. Plaintiff now
seeks a new trial in light of irregularities in the proceedings of the jury, as well as misconduct on
-1-
Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Motion for New Trial
the part of defense counsel, thus preventing Plaintiff from having a fair trial.
As the Declaration of Lauren M. Vogt supporting this Motions indicates at least two jurors
AWN injected external information based on their own expertise in the medical field concerning the
Plaintiff’s injuries and need for medical treatment. Such a claim of expertise or specialized
knowledge of a matter at issue during jury deliberations is misconduct. In re Malone (1996) 12
Cal.4th 935, 963. McDonald v. Southern Transportation (1999) 71 Cal.App.4"‘ 256.
\OWQO\(JI
Plaintiff also seeks a new trial based on defense counsel repeatedly referring to matters that
had been prohibited by the Court, i.e., Plaintiff’s use of smoking, drugs, and alcohol
Between the juror misconduct and the defense counsel’s misconduct Plaintiff was deprived
10 of a fair trial. The Court should exercise its broad discretion to award a new trial.
11 LEGAL ARGUMENT
12 I. THE COURT HAS BROAD AUTHORITY T0 GRANT A NEW TRIAL
13 Code ofCivil Procedure section 657 authorizes this Court to grant a new trial on any or all
l4 of seven statutory grounds, including but not limited to: Irregularity in the proceedings ofthe court,
15 jury or adverse pany. or any order of the court or abuse of discretion by which either party was
16 prevented from having a fair trial. (subd. (1)), Misconduct of the jury; and whenever any one or
17 more of the jurors have been induced to assent to any general or special verdict, or to a finding on
18 a question submitted to them by the court, by a resort to the determination of chance. (subd. (2)).
19 The trial court is required to (and has broad discretion in so doing) rcwcigh the evidence, reassess
20 the credibility of witnesses, draw reasonable inferences from thc evidence received at trial and, in
“
21 general, act as a thirteenth juror.” Jiminez v. Sears Roebuck & Co. (1971) 4 Cal.3d 379, 387;
22 Valdez v. J. D. Diffenbaugh Co. (1975) 51 Cal.App.3d 494, 512.
23 II. A NEW TRIAL SHOULD BE GRANTED BECAUSE OF IRREGULARITIES IN
24 THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE JURY
25 In the present matter the Court should order a new trial duc to misconduct by Juror Laigo, Juror
26 Martinez, and Juror Bonanno, (Code ofCivz'l Procedure section 657, clause 2 [new trial may be
27 granted on the grounds ofjury misconduct]
28 “It is well established throughout the states of the union and in the federal courts that it is
-2-
Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Motion for New Trial
Document Filed Date
January 23, 2024
Case Filing Date
March 06, 2019
Category
PI Motor Vehicle
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
RIZIO LIPINKSY LAW FIRM PC Lauren M. Vogt, Bar No. 326300 SUPERIQRFCA L ED lvogt(a)riziolawfirm.com CgAUNNgggF (5J2; gERCn/I‘A‘ggsgm 2677 North Main Street, Ste 225 WDWO onsmm Santa Ana, CA 92705 JAN 2 3 2024 WW Phone: (714)505-2468 Facsimile: (714)547-1245 NOWQOMAri—t Puneet Toor Bar No. 289893 x 5mm av 245 Fischer Ave. Suite Dl Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Phone: (888) 861-8667 Facsimile: (888) 861-8667 Attorneys for Plaintifi‘, JOHN HYLE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE 0F CALIFORNIA V ‘ COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO «(,0 YEA 13' ?\I JOHN HYLE, CASE NO.: CIVDSI907037 Plaintiff, [Hon. Thomas S. Garza, Dept. 827] v. MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF ARIANNA ATHENA RODRIGUEZ; DAVID MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL; NNNNNNNNNu—ap—nu—IHH—‘H—nb-H J. RODRIGUZ; ELIA M. AGUILAR; and DECLARATION 0F LAUREN M. VOGT DOES through 100, inclusive, IN SUPPORT THEREOF 1 Date: 2/26/24 O°\)O\M&WNHO\OOOVQM&WNHO Defendants. Time: 8:30 A.M. Dept: 827 Complaint Filed: March 6, 2019 Trial Date: October 23, 2023 INTRODUCTION In this matter Plaintiff, John Hylc sought personal injury damages arising from an automobile accident that occurred on March 22, 201 7 in which he was a passenger. Plaintiff now seeks a new trial in light of irregularities in the proceedings of the jury, as well as misconduct on -1- Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Motion for New Trial the part of defense counsel, thus preventing Plaintiff from having a fair trial. As the Declaration of Lauren M. Vogt supporting this Motions indicates at least two jurors AWN injected external information based on their own expertise in the medical field concerning the Plaintiff’s injuries and need for medical treatment. Such a claim of expertise or specialized knowledge of a matter at issue during jury deliberations is misconduct. In re Malone (1996) 12 Cal.4th 935, 963. McDonald v. Southern Transportation (1999) 71 Cal.App.4"‘ 256. \OWQO\(JI Plaintiff also seeks a new trial based on defense counsel repeatedly referring to matters that had been prohibited by the Court, i.e., Plaintiff’s use of smoking, drugs, and alcohol Between the juror misconduct and the defense counsel’s misconduct Plaintiff was deprived 10 of a fair trial. The Court should exercise its broad discretion to award a new trial. 11 LEGAL ARGUMENT 12 I. THE COURT HAS BROAD AUTHORITY T0 GRANT A NEW TRIAL 13 Code ofCivil Procedure section 657 authorizes this Court to grant a new trial on any or all l4 of seven statutory grounds, including but not limited to: Irregularity in the proceedings ofthe court, 15 jury or adverse pany. or any order of the court or abuse of discretion by which either party was 16 prevented from having a fair trial. (subd. (1)), Misconduct of the jury; and whenever any one or 17 more of the jurors have been induced to assent to any general or special verdict, or to a finding on 18 a question submitted to them by the court, by a resort to the determination of chance. (subd. (2)). 19 The trial court is required to (and has broad discretion in so doing) rcwcigh the evidence, reassess 20 the credibility of witnesses, draw reasonable inferences from thc evidence received at trial and, in “ 21 general, act as a thirteenth juror.” Jiminez v. Sears Roebuck & Co. (1971) 4 Cal.3d 379, 387; 22 Valdez v. J. D. Diffenbaugh Co. (1975) 51 Cal.App.3d 494, 512. 23 II. A NEW TRIAL SHOULD BE GRANTED BECAUSE OF IRREGULARITIES IN 24 THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE JURY 25 In the present matter the Court should order a new trial duc to misconduct by Juror Laigo, Juror 26 Martinez, and Juror Bonanno, (Code ofCivz'l Procedure section 657, clause 2 [new trial may be 27 granted on the grounds ofjury misconduct] 28 “It is well established throughout the states of the union and in the federal courts that it is -2- Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Motion for New Trial