Erikson

Erikson v. Weiner

Caution
1996 Cal. App. LEXIS 834·48 Cal. App. 4th 1663·56 Cal. Rptr. 2d 362·96 Daily Journal DAR 10653·61 Cal. Comp. Cases 784
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 29, 1996C019760California4,199 words

Opinion

Opinion

Blease, J.

This is an appeal from a judgment in favor of plaintiff, Gwendolyn Erikson, after a jury trial in a medical malpractice action.

Defendant, Dr. Barry E. Weiner, contends the trial court erred in denying his motion for a new trial predicated on claims of juror misconduct. In the published portion of the opinion we decide that the provision of Code of Civil Procedure section 659a that the trial court may extend the period within which to file an affidavit in support of a new trial “not exceeding 20 days” is mandatory. Accordingly, we will not consider the defendant’s affidavits filed after the expiration of that period. Considering only the affidavits timely filed we will affirm the trial court’s order denying a new trial.

In the unpublished portion of the opinion we reject the defendant’s argument that there is not substantial evidence to support the implied finding that plaintiff, Gwendolyn Erikson, is totally and permanently disabled by reason of defendant’s negligence.

We will affirm the judgment and the order denying a new trial.

Facts and Procedural Background

In March 1991 Erikson was working in a grocery store stocking milk cartons. As she pulled a four-gallon…

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.