Judge: Mark H. Epstein, Case: SC1213117, Date: 2024-09-11 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: SC1213117    Hearing Date: September 11, 2024    Dept: I

The matter is here on a status conference following the court’s granting of Illulian’s motion for a new trial due to jury misconduct.  The court set this hearing to determine the effect on the judgment of the new trial order in light of the court’s equitable determinations as reflected in the Statement of Decision dated February 22, 2024, which became final after the objections to it were overruled on March 29, 2924.  Rav-Noy states that he is willing to forego any additional relief to which he may be entitled were the case to be retried and to accept the judgment as it stands based on the court’s equitable determinations, and his theory is that the court’s equitable findings would bind the jury anyway so there would be nothing left to try.  Rav-Noy notes that the deadline to file a notice of appeal of the court’s order granting the new trial motion is tomorrow, and therefore if the court does not enter a new judgment today, Rav-Noy will need to appeal even though the appeal is (in Rav-Noy’s view) unnecessary given that he would waive a new trial and just go forward with the judgment.  Illulian has not filed any response to Rav-Noy’s position.  (Rav-Noy filed his papers on August 27, 2024.)  The court will inquire of the parties.  Unfortunately, the time to appeal is jurisdictional, so the court will either have to enter a new judgment today or Rav-Noy will need to file his appeal.  (The court granted the motion for a new trial on August 13, 2024.)  The court is unsure what the precise effect would be of that appeal on the current case.  Plainly the jury issues would be before the appellate court and this court would lack any jurisdiction to proceed in any manner regarding a potential retrial of the jury issues until that appeal is decided.  It is not clear, though, that the court would be precluded from continuing to finalize the equitable portion of the case and, if the equitable portion resolves the case entirely, entering a judgment based thereon.  The court will discuss that with the parties as well.  At a minimum, even if the court could not enter a judgment, it could still hold a hearing and announce what it would do if jurisdiction were restored to it, which would have whatever effect it has.