Aguirre

Aguirre v. Reno

Good Law
19 Cal. App. 3d 284·1971 Cal. App. LEXIS 1279·96 Cal. Rptr. 924
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 16, 1971Civ. No. 37595California1,359 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Roth, J.

*286 Opinion

In a jury trial, plaintiff James Aguirre obtained a verdict against defendant William E. Reno for personal injuries sustained when defendant’s 1965 Dodge struck plaintiff’s 1955 black Chevrolet on the Antelope Valley Freeway between 9:30 and 10 p.m. the evening of February 9, 1966.

After both sides had rested, but before the case went to the jury, the defendant (respondent herein) moved for a directed verdict. That motion was denied. Following a verdict for plaintiff (appellant herein) respondent moved for judgment notwithstanding the verdict and for a new trial. Both motions were granted and judgment in favor of the respondent was entered. The motion for a new trial was granted only “In the event . . . [the order granting judgment notwithstanding the verdict] is hereafter reversed, on appeal.”

Appellant argues that since a motion for a directed verdict had been properly denied by the trial court, it had no statutory authority to grant the motion for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict. Appellant’s appeal is confined to the motion N.O.V. There is no appeal from the motion granting a new trial. The latter order is, of course, appealable. (Code Civ. Proc., §…

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.