Vulich

Vulich v. Vulich CA5

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 9, 2025F088070California1,358 words

Opinion

Opinion

Snauffer, J.

BACKGROUND

One day on the family farm, Norman shot and killed his brother Jerry. Law enforcement promptly arrested Norman. The Fresno County District Attorney filed criminal charges against Norman.1 Meanwhile, Jerry’s survivors sued Norman in this civil case for wrongful death. The matter proceeded to trial nearly three years later.2 In the interim, Norman was represented by three separate counsel. Norman’s second counsel took over the case in May 2022. About one year later, that counsel moved to withdraw citing an “ill[ness]” and inability “to practice law.” Norman’s third and final trial counsel substituted in in July 2023.3 New counsel quickly moved to continue the trial scheduled to begin on August 7, 2023. Counsel also sought to reopen discovery. Jerry’s survivors opposed, specifically claiming “there [was] no good cause for a continuance or the reopening of discovery.” The trial court granted the continuance, setting a trial date of March 4, 2024. The request to reopen discovery was denied without prejudice.4 At the end of February 2024, Norman’s trial counsel moved to stay or continue the upcoming trial. Counsel claimed he began to doubt Norman’s cognitive ability in late…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.