Bridges

Bridges v. Smith CA3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 23, 2015C074704California906 words

Opinion

Opinion

DISCUSSION

I. & II. The Trial Court Did Not Err in Denying a Mistrial to Defendant, But Did Err in Awarding Attorney Fees to Plaintiffs

Defendant contends the trial court (Judge Smith) erred in denying defendant’s mistrial motion, when the original trial judge (Judge Schwartz) reportedly “retired” prior to completing the case, thus becoming “unavailable” to consider and sign any proposed order after hearing or to consider the motion for attorney fees and costs subsequently filed by plaintiffs.

Judge Schwartz presided at a two-day bench trial in this matter in January 2013. At the trial’s conclusion, Judge Schwartz, in a minute order and orally on the record, granted plaintiffs a five-year restraining order under section 527.6, and costs (pursuant to a cost bill).

Judge Schwartz then retired before rendering the formal order in this matter. Pursuant to section 635, Judge Smith entered the formal restraining order and an order for costs (per a subsequent cost bill, which totaled $523) in line with Judge Schwartz’s minute order; Judge Smith also awarded plaintiffs, after hearing, $5,050 in attorney fees.

In a bench trial, judgment must be rendered by the judge who tried the…

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.