Judge: Melvin D. Sandvig, Case: 20CHCV00832, Date: 2023-01-04 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 20CHCV00832 Hearing Date: January 4, 2023 Dept: F47
Dept. F47
Date: 1/4/23
Case #20CHCV00832
MOTION FOR NEW
TRIAL and JUDGMENT NOTWITHSTANDING THE VERDICT
Motion filed on 11/29/22.
MOVING PARTY: Defendants Andrew
Michael Parr and Liron Parr
RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiff Brian
Powers
The notice of
motion also indicates that Defendants move for judgment notwithstanding the
verdict as an alternative remedy.
RULING: The motion is denied.
This was an action for breach of contract wherein both
Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant Brian Powers (Powers) and Defendants/Cross-Complainants
Andrew Michael Parr and Liron Parr (the Parrs) claimed that the other breached
a settlement agreement between the parties.
After an expedited jury trial, on 10/24/22, a Judgment on
Special Verdict was entered in favor of
Powers and against the Parrs in the amount of $78,000. The Parrs now move for an order, pursuant to
CCP 657 and 659, setting aside the judgment entered in favor of Powers on
10/24/22 and granting a new trial on the following grounds: (1) Irregularity in
the proceedings of the court, jury or adverse party, or any order of the court
or abuse of discretion by which either party was prevented from having a fair
trial (CCP § 657(1)); (2) Excessive or inadequate damages (CCP § 657(5)); (3)
Insufficiency of the evidence to justify the verdict or other decision, or the
verdict or other decision is against law (CCP § 657(6)); (4) Error in law,
occurring at the trial and excepted to by the party making the application (CCP
§ 657(7)). The notice of motion also
indicates that the Parrs move for judgment notwithstanding the verdict as an
alternative remedy. Powers has opposed
the motion.
Both the Parrs and Powers fail to mention, or realize,
the limited grounds on which a party may move to set aside a verdict or
judgment rendered by a jury or to move for new trial when they have voluntarily
consented to an expedited jury trial as the Parrs and Powers did in this case. By consenting to the expedited jury trial
both the Parrs and Powers agreed that they waived all rights to appeal, to move
for directed verdict, or to make any posttrial motions, except as provided in
CCP 630.08 and CCP 630.09 (See
10/19/22 Consent Order for Voluntary Expedited Jury Trial, p.1, No.4.a.).
CCP 630.08 provides:
“(a) By agreeing to participate in
the expedited jury trial process, the parties agree to waive any motions for
directed verdict, motions to set
aside the verdict or any judgment rendered by the jury, or motions for a new
trial on the basis of inadequate or excessive damages.
(b) The court shall not set aside
any verdict or any judgment, shall not direct that judgment be entered in favor
of a party entitled to judgment as a matter of law, and shall not order a new
trial, except on the grounds stated in Section
630.09.”
CCP 630.09 provides:
“(a) By agreeing to participate in
the expedited jury trial process, the parties agree to waive the right to bring
post-trial motions or to appeal from the determination of the matter, except as
provided in this section. The only grounds on which a party may move for a new
trial or appeal are any of the following:
(1)
Judicial misconduct that materially affected the substantial rights of a party.
(2)
Misconduct of the jury.
(3)
Corruption, fraud, or other undue means employed in the proceedings of the
court, jury, or adverse party that prevented a party from having a fair trial.
(b) Within 10 court days of the
entry of a jury verdict, a party may file with the clerk and serve on each
adverse party a notice of the intention to move for a new trial on any of the
grounds specified in subdivision (a). The notice shall be deemed to be a motion
for a new trial.
(c) Except as provided in
subdivision (b), parties to an expedited jury trial shall not make any
post-trial motions except for motions relating to costs and attorney's fees,
motions to correct a judgment for clerical error, and motions to enforce a
judgment.
(d) Before filing an appeal, a
party shall make a motion for a new trial under subdivision (b). If the motion
for a new trial is denied, the party may appeal the judgment to the appropriate
court with appellate jurisdiction and seek a new trial on any of the grounds
specified in subdivision (a). Parties to an expedited jury trial may not appeal
on any other ground.”
Neither the Parrs nor Powers even mention CCP 630.08 or
CCP 630.09. Additionally, despite the four
grounds set forth in the notice of motion, the memorandum of points and
authorities in support of the motion only argues that the verdict is not
supported by the weight of the evidence or law.
The Parrs have failed to argue or show that this case involved
judicial misconduct that materially affected the substantial rights of a party;
misconduct of the jury; or corruption, fraud, or other undue means employed in
the proceedings of the court, jury, or adverse party that prevented them from
having a fair trial. See CCP
630.09(a). As such, the Parrs are not
entitled to have the judgment on special verdict set aside, a new trial or
judgment notwithstanding the verdict. See
CCP 630.09(b), (c).
Although not necessary for the ruling on this motion, the
Court notes that the exhibits referenced in the declaration attorney Sands
filed in support of the motion are not attached thereto.