Skip to Content (Press Enter)

Skip to Nav (Press Enter)

Jury Trials

The following summaries are of recent published decisions of the California appellate courts, the Ninth Circuit, and the United States Supreme Court. The summaries are presented without regard to whether Severson & Werson represented a party in the case.

Subscribe to California Appellate Tracker

Thank you for your desire to subscribe to Severson & Werson’s Appellate Tracker Weblog. In order to subscribe, you must provide a valid name and e-mail address. This too will be retained on our server. When you push the “subscribe button”, we will send an electronic mail to the address that you provided asking you to confirm your subscription to our Weblog. By pushing the “subscribe button”, you represent and warrant that you are over the age of 18 years old, are the owner/authorized user of that e-mail address, and are entitled to receive e-mails at that address. Our weblog will retain your name and e-mail address on its server, or the server of its web host. However, we won’t share any of this information with anyone except the Firm’s employees and contractors, except under certain extraordinary circumstances described on our Privacy Policy and (About The Consumer Finance Blog/About the Appellate Tracker Weblog) Page. NOTICE AND AGREEMENT REGARDING E-MAILS AND CALLS/TEXT MESSAGES TO LAND-LINE AND WIRELESS TELEPHONES: By providing your contact information and confirming your subscription in response to the initial e-mail that we send you, you agree to receive e-mail messages from Severson & Werson from time-to-time and understand and agree that such messages are or may be sent by means of automated dialing technology. If you have your email forwarded to other electronic media, including text messages and cellular telephone by way of VoIP, internet, social media, or otherwise, you agree to receive my messages in that way. This may result in charges to you. Your agreement and consent also extend to any other agents, affiliates, or entities to whom our communications are forwarded. You agree that you will notify Severson & Werson in writing if you revoke this agreement and that your revocation will not be effective until you notify Severson & Werson in writing. You understand and agree that you will afford Severson & Werson a reasonable time to unsubscribe you from the website, that the ability to do so depends on Severson & Werson’s press of business and access to the weblog, and that you may still receive one or more emails or communications from weblog until we are able to unsubscribe you.

When a party has waived the right to a jury trial by one of the acts or omissions listed in CCP 631, it may still seek relief from that waiver under CCP 631(g).  A trial court exercises discretion in ruling on such a motion and need not grant the motion merely because granting the motion will not cause hardship to… Read More

A forum selection clause in defendant corporation's Delaware by-laws selecting the Delaware Chancery Court as the forum for any shareholder disputes was unenforceable in California state court because there is no right to a jury trial in Delaware Chancery Court so the forum selection clause operated as a pre-suit waiver of the constitutional right to a jury trial which cannot… Read More

This decision holds that an attorney's jury selection notes are not subject to absolute attorney work product protection in connection with a challenge to the jury panel or the judgment based on racial or other discriminatory use of peremptory challenges or claimed the Batson/Wheeler error.  An attorney’s jury selection notes are unlikely to reveal impressions, conclusions, or opinions about the… Read More

CCP 203(a)(5) used to provide that any person convicted of a felony could not serve as a juror.  Now it provides that persons convicted of a felony cannot serve as a juror while in prison or on parole or while required to register as a sex offender.  This decision holds that the sex offender exclusion satisfies the rational basis test… Read More

In this case, ZF sued TAT claiming that the director TAT appointed to ZF's predecessor, ZF Micro Devices, intentionally destroyed that corporation by disparaging its management and working behind the scenes to undermine its efforts to obtain funding.  This decision holds that ZF's claim is legal and must (at ZF's demand) be tried to a jury.  A director's duty to… Read More

Amato violated Riverside County's local rule about filing jointly prepared pretrial statement  witness and exhibit lists, and jury instructions the first day of a jury trial or before.  As a result, the trial court held that Amato had waived his right to a jury trial, and after hearing his evidence, granted a motion for judgment under CCP 631.8.  This decision… Read More

After the Court of Appeal decided in Hollingsworth v. Superior Court (2019) 37 Cal.App.5th 927 that the trial court, having first acquired jurisdiction, should decide whether the Workers Compensation Appeals Board had exclusive jurisdiction over this worker's injury suit--a question that turned on whether the employer had workers compensation insurance coverage at the time plaintiff was injured.  The plaintiff had… Read More

Both employer and employee signed a three-page standalone arbitration agreement, but both failed to put their initials by the bolded provision that said both waived the right to a jury trial.  This decision holds that the parties are bound by the arbitration agreement.  Their signatures showed their assent to its terms which unequivocally bound them to arbitrate.  The employee's uncommunicated… Read More

There is a constitutional right to a jury trial of a claim for nominal statutory damages of $1000 under the California Confidentiality of Medical Information Act. Read More

Trial court prejudicially erred in giving a special jury instruction that in determining whether the city's failure to repaint a faded cross-walk and maintain bushes was negligent, the jury could not consider the condition of the adjacent property or the design of the intersection. Read More

When plaintiff’s attorney improperly used a mini-opening to try to precondition potential jurors to vote in plaintiff's favor, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in not allowing mini-opening statements to the second and third venires of prospective jurors. Read More

Trial court did not violate the parties’ right to a jury trial when it bifurcated a trial in a case involving mixed legal and equitable claims, trying the equitable claims first—after which it ruled plaintiff had not proven causation, thus precluding legal as well as equitable claims.  Read More

A trial court's order denying a party's demand for a jury trial is reviewable before trial by petition for a writ of mandate.  Read More

Juror was discharged and replaced too hastily without adequate investigation, after two fellow jurors complained that she did not participate in the first 90 minutes of deliberations.  Read More

For purposes of the five-year deadline for bringing a civil case to trial, trial “commences” when a jury is impaneled and sworn—even if the voir dire is not concluded within the five-year period.  Read More

1 2