Tagney

Tagney v. Hoy

Good Law
1968 Cal. App. LEXIS 1865·260 Cal. App. 2d 372·67 Cal. Rptr. 261
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 25, 1968Civ. 24132California1,712 words

Opinion

Opinion

Sims, J.

—Defendants have appealed from an order granting plaintiffs a new trial, following entry of judgment on a verdict in favor of defendants, in an action in which plaintiffs sought damages for personal injuries on account of the alleged negligence of defendants.

Defendants’ sole ground of appeal is the failure of the trial court.to specify the reason or reasons for granting the new trial as. required by. the provisions of section 657 of the Code of Civil,Pr.o.eedure. as amended in.1965 (Stats. 1965, ch. 1749, § 1, p. 3922). The order.was made “upon.the ground that the evidence was insufficient to justify the verdict. ” No ■ reason whatever was specified. Under the directive of Mercer v. Perez (1968) 68 Cal.2d 104, 119 [ 65 Cal.Rptr. 315 , 436 P.2d 315 ], there is no legal basis for reAÚeAving the record on the ground of insufficiency of the evidence.

The statute further commands, “On appeal from an order granting a new trial the order shall be affirmed if it should Have been granted upon any ground stated in the motion, whether or not specified in the order or specification of reasons provided [there follows exceptions relating to certain grounds].” . This language has been…

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.