Motion to Bifurcate Civil Trial in Louisiana

Understanding the Purpose and Significance of a Motion to Bifurcate Civil Trial

“According to La. C.C.P. art. 1631, the trial court has the power to require that the proceedings be conducted with dignity and in an orderly and expeditious manner, and to control the proceedings at the trial, so that justice is done.” (See Giglio v. Anpac La. Ins. Co. (2020) 309 So. 3d 416, 421.)

As such, “the trial court has authority to order a separate trial of properly cumulated actions at any time prior to trial, if severance would simplify the proceedings, permit a more orderly disposition of the case, or otherwise would be in the interest of justice.” (See LSA-C.C.P. art. 465; Sparacello v. Andrews (1987) 501 So. 2d 269, 274.)

Procedural Steps Involved in Filing a Motion to Bifurcate Civil Trial

The rule for separate trials of cumulated actions is governed under Article 465 of the Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure.

It states, “when the court is of the opinion that it would simplify the proceedings, would permit a more orderly disposition of the case, or would otherwise be in the interest of justice, at any time prior to trial, it may order a separate trial of cumulated actions, even if the cumulation is proper.” (See La. Code Civ. Proc. art. 465.)

Article 1562 of the Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure governs separate trials of issues of insurance coverage, liability and damages.

Discretion of the Court in Deciding a Motion to Bifurcate Civil Trial

“The trial court is vested with much discretion in determining whether to grant a motion to sever, and its ruling should be upheld in the absence of an abuse of this discretion.” (See State v. Simmons (2003) 848 So. 2d 58, 64.)

“Generally, an abuse of discretion results from a conclusion reached capriciously or in an arbitrary manner.” (See Sullivan v. Brookshire Grocery Co. & Sealy Uptown, LLC (2022) 348 So. 3d 872, 875.)

“The word ‘arbitrary’ implies a disregard of evidence or the proper weight thereof. A conclusion is ‘capricious’ when there is no substantial evidence to support it or the conclusion is contrary to substantiated competent evidence.” (See id.)

“Although a reviewing court defers to reasonable decisions within the trial court's discretion, a decision based upon an erroneous interpretation or application of the law, rather than a valid exercise of discretion, is not entitled to such deference.” (See id.)

Legal Precedents and Case Law on a Motion to Bifurcate Civil Trial

“It is well-settled that the issues of liability and damages are often bifurcated.” (See Ellender v. Neff Rental, Inc. (2007) 965 So. 2d 898, 901.)

It is also well settled that “cumulation or joinder of separate claims against the same defendant or joinder of two or more defendants is permitted only if [e]ach of the actions cumulated is… brought in the proper venue." (See Element Pictures, L.L.C. v. LIFT (La. Inst. of Film Tech.) L.L.C. (2018) 317 So. 3d 859, 864.)