When a motion for a new trial is granted on all or part of the issues raised in the motion, what grounds must the court specify?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Wang v. TDS Grp., Inc., H038786 (Cal. App. 2014):
When a motion for new trial is granted on all or part of the issues raised in the motion, section 657 provides that "the court shall specify the ground or grounds upon which it is granted and the court's reason or reasons for granting the new trial . . . ." ( 657; Sanchez-Corea v. Bank of America (1985) 38 Cal.3d 892, 899.) Thus, "[s]ection 657 clearly distinguishes between grounds and reasons." (Id. at p. 902.)
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
Other Questions
Does a motion for a new trial have to be granted because the trial court refused to grant a motion to sever? (California, United States of America)
Does a motion for a new trial have to be granted because the trial court refused to grant a motion to sever? (California, United States of America)
Does a motion for a new trial have to be granted because the trial court refused to grant a motion to sever? (California, United States of America)
Does a court's specification of reasons for granting a motion for a new trial, which does not state any grounds or reasons for the decision to grant the motion, constitute untimely and void? (California, United States of America)
Can a defendant obtain a new trial on the grounds that the trial court did not abuse its discretion to deny the motion on the same grounds as the previous motion? (California, United States of America)
Is there any case law where the trial court would have exercised its discretion not to award a motion for damages even if the trial judge was aware of the fact that the motion was being brought before the court? (California, United States of America)
Does a motion for a new trial need to be denied because the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for new trial? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for denying a motion for a new trial on the grounds that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in denying the motion under the first two grounds? (California, United States of America)
When a defendant makes a mid-trial motion to revoke his self represented status and have standby counsel appointed for the remainder of the trial, does the trial court have a duty to manage the trial? (California, United States of America)
Can a party who fails to raise issues before the trial court raise new issues on appeal? (California, United States of America)
