Source: http://www.kinseylaw.com/clientserv2/civillitigationserv/civiltrial/civiltrial.html
Timestamp: 2018-02-21 00:59:07
Document Index: 98126520

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 592', '§ 116', '§ 116', '§ 16', '§ 220', '§ 16', '§ 320', '§ 631', '§ 631', '§ 350', '§ 1152', '§ 1151', '§ 3294', '§ 3295', '§ 787', '§ 352', '§ 352', '§ 352', '§ 1048', '§ 3295', '§ 438', '§ 777', '§ 229', '§ 767', '§ 764', '§ 703', '§ 704', '§ 616', '§ 581', '§ 630', '§ 9', '§ 607', '§ 607', '§ 613', '§ 216', '§ 614', '§ 632', '§ 632', '§ 632', '§ 634', '§ 624', '§ 624', '§ 618', '§ 628', '§ 668', '§ 664', '§ 664', '§ 664', '§ 664', '§ 664', '§ 1032', '§ 1032', '§ 1033', '§ 1033', '§ 1013', '§ 473', '§ 657', '§ 657', '§ 663', '§ 663']

Trial Of Civil Cases In California - From Kinsey Law Offices
When You Need An Experienced Civil Trial Attorney
When a case doesn't settle, the trial preparation process is often very tedious and time-consuming.
"In actions for the recovery of specific, real, or personal property, with or without damages, or for money claimed as due upon contract, or as damages for breach of contract, or for injuries, an issue of fact must be tried by a jury, unless a jury trial is waived, or a reference is ordered as provided in this Code. Where in these cases there are issues both of law and fact, the issue of law must be first disposed of. In other cases, issues of fact must be tried by the Court, subject to its power to order any such issue to be tried by a jury, or to be referred to a referee, as provided in this Code." [Ca Civ Pro § 592]
Exception - Small Claims Actions: Small claims hearings are required to be "informal" (Ca Civ Pro § 116.510). Therefore, there is no right to a jury trial either in small claims actions or on appeal of a small claims judgment to the superior court. [See Ca Civ Pro § 116.770(b); Crouchman v. Sup.Ct. (El Dorado Investors) (1988) 45 Cal.3d 1167, 1173, 248 Cal.Rptr. 626, 628]
In civil cases, "the jury shall consist of 12 persons or a lesser number agreed on by the parties in open court." [Ca Const. Art. I, § 16; see Ca Civ Pro § 220] The parties may stipulate "in open court" to a jury of less than 12 members in superior court civil cases. [Ca Const. Art. I, § 16; L.A. Sup.Ct. Rules 8.20(c)]
Distinction Between "Law" and "Equity": "As a general proposition, the jury trial is a matter of right in a civil action at law, but not in equity." [C & K Engineering Contractors v. Amber Steel Co., Inc. (1978) 23 Cal.3d 1, 8, 151 Cal.Rptr. 323, 326]
To determine whether an action is "Legal" or "Equitable", the court must make a historical analysis. The constitutional right to jury trial is "the right as it existed at common lawin 1850 when the (California) Constitution was first adopted . . ." [C & K Engineering Contractors v. Amber Steel Co., Inc., supra, 23 Cal.3d at 8, 151 Cal.Rptr. at 326 (emphasis and parentheses added)] The common law at the time the California Constitution was adopted includes the common law of England at that time . . . both "the lex non scripta and the written statutes enacted by Parliament." [People v. One 1941 Chevrolet Coupe (1951) 37 Cal.2d 283, 286-287, 231 P.2d 832, 835]
"Gist Of The Action": A jury trial must be granted where the "gist" of the action is legal rather than equitable in nature. [C & K Engineering Contractors v. Amber Steel Co., Inc. (1978) 23 Cal.3d 1, 9, 151 Cal.Rptr. 323, 327; Arciero Ranches v. Meza (1993) 17 Cal.App.4th 114, 125, 21 Cal.Rptr.2d 127, 134; Jefferson v. County of Kern (2002) 98 Cal.App.4th 606, 614, 120 Cal.Rptr.2d 1, 6]
Hybred Actions: Sometimes, legal and equitable issues are raised in the same cause of action (e.g., lien foreclosure proceedings); or in separate pleadings (e.g., equitable defenses to legal claims). If the legal and equitable issues are severable, the judge will decide the equitable issues, while the right to jury trial is preserved for the legal issues. If the issues are not severable, the right to a jury is determined under the "gist of the action" test (above). [Unilogic, Inc. v. Burroughs Corp. (1992) 10 Cal.App.4th 612, 622-623, 12 Cal.Rptr.2d 741, 746] If the equitable and legal issues are tried separately, the order in which they are tried becomes significant. The judge's findings of fact on equitable issues affect the jury's determination of the legal issues.
Actions Classified As Legal (To Be Tried By A Jury): The actions noted below are recognized to be "legal" in nature and hence triable by jury. (This is, by no means, a complete list)
Actions Classified As Equitable (To Be Tried By A Judge): The actions noted below are recognized to be "equitable" in nature and hence triable by a judge and not a jury. (Again, this is, by no means, a complete list)
Declaratory Relief: But Note: right to jury trial exists in a declaratory relief action "where such a right would be guaranteed if the proceeding were coercive rather than declaratory in nature." [State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Sup.Ct. (Corrick) (1956) 47 Cal.2d 428, 432, 304 P.2d 13, 15]
Where both legal and equitable issues or claims are to be tried, the order of trial becomes significant because findings of fact on the issues first tried may affect the issues tried later. The order of proof at trial is generally discretionary with the trial judge. [Ca Evid § 320--"Except as otherwise provided by law, the court in its discretion shall regulate the order of proof"]
In actions involving both legal and equitable issues, most courts will try the equitable issues first without a jury because this may obviate the necessity for jury trial of the legal issues. I.e., the court's rulings on the equitable issues may establish rights or defenses that leave nothing further to be tried.
Timely Demand For Jury: Trial by jury is waived unless a jury demand is made "at the time the cause is first set for trial, if it is set upon notice or stipulation, or "within five days after notice of setting if it is set without notice or stipulation." [Ca Civ Pro § 631(d)(4)]
Posting Jury Fees: At least 25 days before the date set for trial (5 days in unlawful detainer actions), a party must deposit with the clerk or judge an advance jury fee not to exceed "one hundred fifty dollars ($150) . . . " [Ca Civ Pro § 631(b)]
On or before the trial date, the Judge may set a "final Status Conference" between the judge and trial counsel at which final orders are made governing the scope and conduct of trial.
to set the "ground rules" for trial on such matters as voir dire, exchange and premarking exhibits and other "housekeeping" considerations;
Local "fast track" rules typically require one final status conference shortly before trial. (These final status conferences are intended to shorten the traditional in-chambers conference by resolving many matters earlier.) [L.A. Sup.Ct. Rule 7.9(h)--no more than 10 days; S.D. Sup.Ct. Rule 2.1.15--"trial readiness conference" 4 weeks before trial; Orange Sup.Ct. Rule 450--"issue conference" involving counsel only at least 10 days before trial]
Motion In Liminie: A motion in limine is a motion "at the threshold" of trial to exclude evidence deemed inadmissible and prejudicial by the moving party. Its purpose is to "avoid the obviously futile attempt to 'unring the bell'" when highly prejudicial evidence is offered and then stricken at trial.
The most common use of a motion in limine is to prevent opposing parties from any use of certain prejudicial evidence. Unless the court is willing to reconsider, the evidence is permanently excluded from the trial. In addition to excluding highly prejudicial evidence, the court may instruct opposing counsel to avoid any mention of the evidence in question during trial or in argument to the jury; and to direct persons under their control (counsel's associates, clients, witnesses, etc.) likewise to avoid such mention.
Pursuant to the California Rules of Court (Ca Rules of Court Rule), the trial judge has discretion to set the "timing and place of filing and service" of a motion in limine. [See Ca Rules of Court Rule 312(d)] In some courts using a "direct calendar" system (same judge handles cases throughout), motions in limine generally are heard at the final status conference before trial (normally 10 days before trial). [See L.A. Sup.Ct. Rule 7.9(h)] In other courts using a "direct calendar" system, motions in limine generally are set for hearing on the date set for trial, although the motion papers are ordinarily exchanged and filed before trial. [See Orange Sup.Ct. Rule 450--motions in limine exchanged at "issue conference" 10 days before trial; S.D. Sup.Ct. Rule 2.1.18--filed 5 court days (served 2 court days) before trial call]
Typical Plaintiff's Motions In Liminie: The following matters are typical of those which may be challenged by plaintiffs before trial by motion in limine:
Collateral Source Payments: Evidence that plaintiff has been reimbursed or received payments from a "collateral source" is generally inadmissible in personal injury cases.
Subrogation: Where an action is filed in plaintiff's name, evidence that the claim is really owned (in whole or in part) by an insurance company as subrogee is generally inadmissible in a liability action.
Tax Consequences Of Personal Injury Award: Evidence that plaintiff's recovery will not be subject to income taxation is inadmissible in a personal injury case.
Unfavorable Irrelevant Evidence: Anything unfavorable to plaintiff may be excluded if irrelevant to the issues in the case (see Ca Evid § 350). For example, such things as plaintiff's:
Facts Likely To Curry Sympathy For Defendant: Facts helpful to the defendant may be excluded if irrelevant to the issues in the case. For example, such things as defendant's:
lack of prior accidents with the product or instrumentality causing plaintiff's injuries.
Typical Defendant's Motions In Liminie: The following are typical matters defendants may seek to exclude by motion in limine:
Settlement Offers To Prove Liability: Although admissible for other purposes, settlement offers are not admissible to prove defendant's liability for the loss or damage involved. [Ev.C § 1152]
Post Accident Repairs To Prove Liability: Evidence that defendant changed or repaired the property or product involved after the accident is generally inadmissible in liability cases to prove defendant's fault. [See Ca Evid § 1151]
Defendant's Net Worth On Punitive Damages Claims: On motion of any defendant, evidence of that defendant's net worth or its profits from the allegedly-wrongful conduct is inadmissible until plaintiff has first proved a prima facie case of liability for punitive damages under Civil Code § 3294 ("malice, oppression or fraud"). [Ca Civil § 3295(d)]
Scientific Tests Or Studies Not Shown To Be Reliable: [People v. Kelly (1976) 17 Cal.3d 24, 32, 130 Cal.Rptr. 144, 149 ("voice print" identification)]
Witness Nonfelony Criminal Record: A witness' criminal record, other than a felony conviction relating to veracity, is inadmissible to attack the witness' credibility (Ca Evid § 787)
Evidence barred by "evidence sanction"
Evidence excludible under Ca Evid § 352: A motion in limine can be used to ask the court to exercise its discretion under Ca Evid § 352 to exclude photographs, physical evidence, or other materials whose "probative value is substantially outweighed" by the probability their admission will necessitate undue consumption of time or create substantial danger of undue prejudice, confusing the issues or misleading the jury. [Ca Evid § 352]
Motion To Sever Or Bifurcate: Motions to sever or bifurcate ask for separate trials on various parts of a single case, or to split up several cases previously consolidated for trial. A motion to "sever" asks the court to order separate trials of issues, causes of action, or parties joined in a single action. The purpose of severence is to avoid prejudice, to promote convenience, or to permit greater expedience and economy. [Ca Civ Pro § 1048(b)] A motion to "bifurcate" is a type of severance motion. It asks for a separate trial on the issue of liability before trial of damages.
"Separate trials" does not necessarily mean trials by different juries. In most cases, the court has discretion to impanel a different jury or allow the same jury that heard the first trial to hear the second trial as well. (Exception: The same jury must hear both phases of a bifurcated punitive damages trial.) [Ca Civil § 3295(d)]
Motion For Judgment On The Pleadings: A motion for judgment on the pleadings is in effect a general demurrer to the opposing party's pleadings but is made after the time for demurrer has expired. Except as provided by statute (Ca Civ Pro § 438), the rules governing demurrers apply.
Motion To Disqualify Opposing Counsel: Trial courts have inherent power to disqualify counsel when necessary "for the furtherance of justice."
Exclusion Of Witnesses From Courtroom: On the motion of any party or sua sponte, the court may order witnesses excluded so that they cannot hear the testimony of other witnesses. [Ca Evid § 777; see L.A. Sup.Ct. Rule 8.84] "The purpose . . . is to prevent tailored testimony and aid in the detection of less than candid testimony."
General disqualification--that the juror is disqualified from serving in the action on trial. All persons are qualified for jury service except those who are:
"member of the family of either party" (thus including nonblood relatives--e.g.,
Prior juror or witness in litigation involving party: A prospective juror may be challenged for implied bias if he or she served "as a trial or grand juror or on a (coroner's) jury of inquest . . . or been a witness on a previous . . . trial between the same parties, or involving the same specific offense or cause of action or "as a trial or grand juror . . . within one year previously in any criminal or civil action . . . in which either party was the plaintiff or defendant . . ." [Ca Civ Pro § 229(c)]
No Leading Questions On Direct Examination: Except as discussed below, leading questions are improper on direct (or redirect) examination. [See Ca Evid § 767(a)(1)] A leading question is one that asks the witness to acknowledge facts stated or suggested in the question. In effect, the questioner is doing the testifying and simply asking the witness to affirm what the questioner has stated. [See Ca Evid § 764--leading question "suggests to the witness the answer the examining party desires"] The problem with a leading question is that it substitutes the lawyer's description of the events in dispute for that of the witness.
As the trial progresses, it may be necessary to make on or more motions. Some - but by no means all - such motions are discussed below.
Mandatory Mistrial - Judge As A Witness: The judge presiding at the trial may not testify as a witness if any party objects thereto. If called as a witness and an objection is made, the judge must declare a mistrial and order the case assigned for trial before a different judge. [Ca Evid § 703(b)]
Mandatory Mistrial - Juror As A Witness: A juror impaneled in the trial of an action may not testify as a witness over the objection of any party. Upon such objection, the trial judge must declare a mistrial and order retrial before a different jury. [Ca Evid § 704(b)]
Mandatory Mistrial - Jury Unable To Reach A Virdict: A mistrial must be ordered when the jury is discharged because unable to reach a verdict (e.g., because hopelessly deadlocked) or is "prevented from giving a verdict because of accident or other cause." [Ca Civ Pro § 616]
Mandatory Mistrial - Insufficient Number Of Jurors: Sometimes, a number of jurors are excused during trial (for illness or other reason) and there are not enough alternate jurors to take their places. In such cases, a mistrial must be ordered unless the parties stipulate that a lesser number of jurors may render a verdict.
Motion For Nonsuit: "Only after, and not before, the plaintiff has completed his or her opening statement, or after the presentation of his or her evidence in a trial by jury, the defendant, without waiving his or her right to offer evidence in the event the motion is not granted, may move for a judgment of nonsuit." [Ca Civ Pro § 581c(a)]
A motion for nonsuit operates as a "demurrer" to plaintiff's evidence. It allows defendant to challenge the legal sufficiency of plaintiff's claims at an early stage of trial without waiving the right to present a defense if the motion is denied. Defendant in effect concedes the truth of plaintiff's evidence (or the facts asserted in plaintiff's opening statement where the motion is made after opening statement). The nonsuit motion challenges whether these facts are sufficient as a matter of law to prove a prima facie case.
Because a nonsuit deprives plaintiff of the right to have his or her case determined by a jury, it is proper only under very restrictive circumstances: i.e., only where interpreting the evidence most favorably to plaintiff's case and most strongly against the defendant and resolving all presumptions, inferences and doubts in favor of plaintiff a judgment for the defendant is required as a matter of law. The motion lies only if there is no substantial conflict in the evidence. In ruling on the motion, the court may not weigh the evidence or consider the credibility of witnesses.
A nonsuit may be granted on some or all of plaintiff's claims: If it appears that the evidence presented, or to be presented, supports the granting of the motion as to some but not all of the issues involved in the action, the court shall grant the motion as to those issues and the action shall proceed as to the issues remaining.
In response to a motion for nonsuit, plaintiffs have the right, upon request, to reopen to remedy defects raised by the nonsuit motion: "(I)t is the trial court's duty, if so requested, to permit the plaintiff to reopen his case and introduce further evidence. The right to present further evidence is waived unless plaintiff requests leave to reopen and makes an offer of proof describing the evidence and explaining how it would cure the deficiencies.
Motion For Directed Verdict: "Unless the court specified an earlier time . . . after all parties have completed the presentation of all of their evidence in a trial by jury, any party may, without waiving his or her right to trial by jury in the event the motion is not granted, move for an order directing entry of a verdict in its favor." [Ca Civ Pro § 630(a)]
A motion for directed verdict, like a motion for nonsuit, operates as a demurrer to the evidence. It challenges the legal sufficiency of the opposing party's evidence--i.e., whether such evidence makes out a prima facie case of the claim or defense asserted.
Timing: Defendant can move for nonsuit after plaintiff's opening statement or after plaintiff's case in chief. But a motion for directed verdict can be made only after all parties rest, unless the court specifies an earlier time
Denial of nonsuit no bar to directed verdict: A court may grant a directed verdict in favor of the defendant despite its earlier denial of defendant's motion for nonsuit.
Motion For Recess Or Continuance Of Trial: For "good cause" shown (e.g., illness of party or counsel), the court may grant a recess or continuance during trial. [See Ca Rules of Court Rule 375(a); and Standards of Judicial Admin. § 9, Ca Rules of Court Rule Appendix Div. I]
The statutory order of proceedings is for the parties to argue the case to the jury "when the evidence is concluded" and before the court instructs the jury. [Ca Civ Pro § 607(7),(9)] But the statute expressly authorizes the court to alter the order of proceedings "for special reasons." [Ca Civ Pro § 607 (first para.)]
The Judicial Council of California Civil Jury Instructions ("CACI") are the official instructions for use in state trial courts and were designed to "accurately state the law in a way that is understandable to the average juror." [Ca Rules of Court Rule 855(a)] Use of the Judicial Council instructions is "strongly encouraged." [Ca Rules of Court Rule 855(e)]
After submission of the case, the jurors must be "kept together, in some convenient place, under charge of an officer" (bailiff or court attendant) until they arrive at a verdict or are discharged by the court. [See Ca Civ Pro § 613] All courts are equipped with jury deliberation rooms enabling jurors to discuss the case and endeavor to arrive at a verdict in complete privacy. [See Ca Civ Pro § 216--board of supervisors required to provide jury deliberation room(s).
Ordinarily, one of the first orders of business is selection of a "presiding juror" (jury foreperson). The court may instruct the jurors that when they go to the jury room, the first thing they should do is "choose a presiding juror" who "should see to it that . . . discussions are orderly and that everyone has a fair chance to be heard." [CACI 5009; see BAJI 15.50-15.52--upon retiring, "select one of your number to act as foreperson" . . . and "your foreperson shall preside over your deliberations".
Jurors often find themselves in disagreement as to what a particular witness said at trial and may request to have that testimony read by the court reporter. [See Ca Civ Pro § 614] The parties or counsel often ask for reading of testimony in addition to that requested by the jurors. They usually argue that the other testimony is necessary to make the requested part "understandable"; or that it would not be "fair" to consider only that requested portion by itself, etc. However, counsel have no right to designate additional testimony. It is entirely within the court's discretion to determine whether it is fair to read only the segment requested by the jury or whether additional portions should be read to avoid a "misleading" or "incomplete" understanding of the testimony. [Asplund v. Driskell (1964) 225 Cal.App.2d 705, 714, 37 Cal.Rptr. 652, 657]
The timeliness of the request depends on the length of the trial. [Ca Civ Pro § 632] In trials completed in one calendar day, or within less than eight hours over several days, a request for statement of decision must be made before the matter is submitted for decision. [Ca Civ Pro § 632; see Ca Rules of Court Rule 232(h)] For court trials lasting longer than a day (or more than eight hours over several days), a request for a statement of decision must be made "within 10 days after the court announces a tentative decision." [Ca Civ Pro § 632]
Any party affected by the judgment may serve and file objections to the statement of decision on the ground it omits findings on critical issues controverted at trial, or that its findings as to such issues are ambiguous. [See Ca Civ Pro § 634; Ca Rules of Court Rule 232(d)] The losing party has 15 days after service of the court's proposed statement of decision to serve and file objections thereto. [Ca Rules of Court Rule 232(d)]
General verdict--whereby the jury decides all issues in favor of one party or the other;
General verdict with special interrogatories--whereby, in addition to the verdict itself, the jury is asked to answer certain questions designed to test the validity of the verdict; or
Special verdict--whereby the jury makes factual findings from which the court draws legal conclusions and renders judgment based thereon.
A special verdict is one "by which the jury finds the facts only, leaving the judgment to the Court." [Ca Civ Pro § 624] A special verdict must present conclusions of fact (i.e., ultimate facts) established by the evidence rather than the evidence itself. Those ultimate facts must be presented so that "nothing shall remain to the Court but to draw from them conclusions of law." [Ca Civ Pro § 624] Unlike a general verdict that implies findings in favor of the prevailing party, a special verdict requires the jury to determine every controverted fact issue. A "partial special verdict" may be entered where the jury has decided all the ultimate facts necessary on a "separate and severable" cause of action. The remaining causes of action must be retried, of course, before a final judgment can be entered.
At this point, either party may require that the jury be polled, which is done by the clerk asking each juror, by name, if it is his or her verdict. ("Is the verdict as read your personal verdict?"; or where a special verdict or special interrogatories are used, "Is the response to that question your personal response?") [See Ca Civ Pro § 618; L.A. Sup.Ct. Rule 8.56] If at least three-fourths of the jurors express agreement with the verdict, the clerk will enter it in the court's minutes. The entry consists of the verdict itself (set out at length), together with the names of the jurors and witnesses, and the time of trial. [See Ca Civ Pro § 628]
In a nonjury trial, after trial of any fact question, the court will announce its tentative decision, either orally (which must be entered in the minutes) or by written statement filed with the court clerk. [Ca Rules of Court Rule 232(a)] The tentative decision is not a judgment and is not binding on the court. The judge may modify or change it at any time (but any such modification must also be mailed to all parties who appeared at trial). [Ca Rules of Court Rule 232(a)] If a statement of decision has been timely requested, the court in its tentative decision (above) may state whether the statement of decision will be prepared by the court or a designated party. Alternatively, it may direct that the tentative decision "shall be" the statement of decision unless, within 10 days, one of the parties proposes issues not covered by the tentative decision. [Ca Rules of Court Rule 232(a)]
The "entry of judgment" is a clerical act. In most courts, judgments are "entered" by the clerk's filing of the judgment (i.e., file-stamping the original judgment signed by the court and placing it in the court file) without regard to the time the judgment is recorded. [Ca Civ Pro § 668.5] Until judgment is so "entered," it is not effective for any purpose. [Ca Civ Pro § 664] In a jury trial, the entry of judgment follows routinely after the clerk's entry of the verdict. The judgment is not effective until entered. [Ca Civ Pro § 664]
Where the prevailing party is in pro per, the court clerk is required to mail notice of entry of judgment to all parties who have appeared in the action "promptly upon the entry of judgment." [Ca Civ Pro § 664.5(b)] In marital status actions (marriage dissolution, legal separation, or nullity proceedings), it is the clerk's responsibility to mail notice of entry of judgment. [See Ca Civ Pro § 664.5; Ca Rules of Court Rule 1247] Notwithstanding the prevailing party's duty to serve notice of entry of judgment, the court may order such notice to be given by the clerk. [See Ca Civ Pro § 664.5(d)]
The right to recover costs of suit is determined entirely by statute. [Ca Civ Pro § 1032 et seq.] The right to recover costs is purely statutory, and, in the absence of an authorizing statute, no costs can be recovered by either party. The procedures for obtaining costs are governed by Judicial Council Rules. [Ca Rules of Court Rule 870, 870.2, 870.4; see also Ca Rules of Court Rule 27, 135--costs on appeal]
Costs recoverable under § 1032 are restricted to those that are both reasonable in amount; and reasonably necessary to the conduct of the litigation. [Ca Civ Pro § 1033.5(c)(2) & (3)] Costs "merely convenient or beneficial to its preparation" are disallowed. [Ca Civ Pro § 1033.5(c)(2)] The court has power to disallow even costs allowable as a matter of right if they were not "reasonably necessary"; and to reduce the amount of any cost item to that which is "reasonable."
The losing party may dispute any or all of the items in the prevailing party's costs memorandum by a motion to strike or tax costs. [See Ca Rules of Court Rule 870(b)] Technically, a motion to strike challenges the entire costs bill (e.g., on the ground the claimant is not the "prevailing party"), whereas a motion to tax challenges particular items or amounts. But the terms are often used interchangeably and there is no difference in the procedural rules. [See Ca Rules of Court Rule 870(b)(2)] A motion to strike or tax costs must be served and filed within 15 days after service of the costs memorandum. This period is extended as provided by Ca Civ Pro § 1013 if the costs memorandum was served by mail. [Ca Rules of Court Rule 870(b)(1)] Delay in challenging (or failure to challenge) a costs bill waives any objection to the costs claimed thereon. Even so, the court has discretion to grant Ca Civ Pro § 473(b) relief for "inadvertence" or "excusable neglect" to consider late-filed motions.
Jury Irregularity: "Irregularity in the proceedings of the jury" - The precise meaning and scope of this phrase has never been judicially determined.
Excessive damages (Ca Civ Pro § 657(5)): This ground in effect asks for a limited new trial--i.e., a new trial limited to the issues of damages (findings re liability, etc. to be kept intact).
Inadequate damages (Ca Civ Pro § 657(5)): "Inadequate damages" is likewise ground for a new trial motion. Again, this ground asks for a limited new trial--i.e., a new trial limited to the issues of damages (findings re liability, etc. to be kept intact).
Motion to Vacate Judgment: The trial court is empowered to set aside a judgment on either of two grounds "materially affecting the substantial rights of the (moving) party and entitling the party to a different judgment." [Ca Civ Pro § 663] This motion to vacate may only be used to set aside a judgment based on a decision by the court (nonjury trial); or a jury's special verdict. [Ca Civ Pro § 663]