Personal Injury Lawyer Blog
(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this workplace discrimination/personal injury case and its proceedings.)
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL
INTRODUCTION
By this Motion, Plaintiff Bobby White (“Plaintiff”) respectfully requests that the Court make an order granting him a new trial. There is significant irregularity in the proceedings by the parties adverse to Plaintiff (CCP § 657(1)), insufficient evidence (CCP § 657(6)), and error in law excepted to during trial (CCP § 657(7)), each of which prevented Plaintiff from having a fair trial. For each of these reasons, Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court grant his motion for a new trial.
This workplace discrimination and harassment case was resolved after more than two weeks of trial, which began on March 26, 2007. On April 10, 2007, the case was submitted to the jury. The jury came back the next afternoon, April 11, 2007, with verdicts in all instances for defendants. At the last minute, in a manner designed to deceive the jury, the court, and plaintiff, defendants, who were charged with preparing the special verdict forms for the jury, revised them so that they misstated the law. Even though the jury wanted to find for the injured plaintiff, the revised special verdict forms kept them from doing so.
In addition, there is simply insufficient evidence in the record to justify the jury’s verdict, and there were errors in law during trial, as more particularly set forth below. (See Part 2 of 12.)
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.