The following blog entry is written to illustrate a common motion filed during civil litigation. Reviewing this kind of filing should help potential plaintiffs and clients better understand how parties in personal injury cases present such issues to the court.
(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this elder abuse lawsuit and its proceedings.)
PROPOSED TRIAL SEQUENCE cont.
Phase II: Jury Trial on the Amount of Punitive Damages. If the predicates for punitive damages are established in Phase I, the same jury would decide the amount of punitive damages.
Phase III: Bench Trial on UCL and FAL Claims. In this phase, the Court would resolve plaintiffs’ claims under the UCL and FAL statutes, including the amount of restitution, if any, and plaintiffs’ claim for injunctive relief. The Court would also determine the amount of the civil penalties, if any, pursuant to the District Attorney’s claims under the UCL. Plaintiffs anticipate that most (if not all) of the evidence pertinent to the liability and remedy issues on the equitable claims will be introduced in Trial Phases I and II. To the extent necessary, however, the Court could take additional evidence concerning the UCL and FAL claims.
Phase IV: Claims Administration. If plaintiffs prevail, plaintiffs recommend that the Court direct a third party claims administrator to distribute the aggregate class award to individual class members. (See Code of Civil Procedure § 384.) In other words, this phase would be a nonadversary administrative claims procedure in which the overall class award would be allocated to individual class members. (See In re Cipro Cases I & II (2004) 121 Cal. App. 4th 402, 417 [claim administration is an internal class accounting question “that does not directly concern the defendant” as liability and overall damages have already been determined].)
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.