Barboni

Barboni v. Tuomi

Good Law
148 Cal. Rptr. 3d 581·2012 Cal. App. LEXIS 1093·210 Cal. App. 4th 340
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 1, 2012No. G045788California5,204 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Moore, J.

*342 Opinion

Plaintiff Jean Barboni appeals a jury verdict in favor of defendants Fred and Linda Tuomi in this slip and fall premises liability case. She argues the trial court erroneously denied her motion for new trial based on juror misconduct, asserting that the jury wrongfully considered evidence of liability insurance against the court’s instructions. We conclude the trial court properly considered competing juror declarations and found Barboni failed to establish juror misconduct. She also claims she is entitled to a new trial because the trial court permitted the Tuomis to designate their expert witnesses late. We conclude the court did not abuse its discretion on this point, and even if there was error, it did not constitute a miscarriage of justice requiring a new trial. We therefore affirm.

I

FACTS

A. Underlying Facts

The basic facts underlying this case are fairly straightforward. As of January 2009, the Tuomis owned a home in Laguna Niguel. At the time, their primary residence was in Chicago, and they returned to Laguna Niguel a few days at a time for holidays and long weekends. Barboni is the owner of a pet sitting business. The Tuomis hired her to house-sit…

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.