Does misconduct by an attorney justify a new trial?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Pac. Asian Enters., Inc. v. Conconi, c/w G054124, G053910 (Cal. App. 2018):
proceedings].) Attorney misconduct justifies a new trial only if it is reasonably probable the party moving for a new trial would have achieved a more favorable result absent the misconduct. (Cassim v. Allstate Ins. Co. (2004) 33 Cal.4th 780, 802.)
"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
Is a defendant entitled to a fair trial if his trial attorney objected to the alleged judicial misconduct or impeachment evidence? (California, United States of America)
Can a criminal defendant seek a new trial on the grounds that the district attorney or other counsel prosecuting the case has been guilty of prejudicial misconduct during the trial? (California, United States of America)
Is a jury's failure to pay attention to the evidence presented at trial a form of misconduct which will justify a new trial if shown to be prejudicial to the losing party? (California, United States of America)
Is a client's attorney required to repay all moneys laid out by the attorney to the attorney before the client can make a claim against the attorney? (California, United States of America)
Can a litigant who is seeking a new trial based on jury misconduct make an affidavit stating that he and his attorney did not know of the misconduct until after the jury rendered its verdict? (California, United States of America)
Does a defendant waive their right to object on appeal to a plaintiff's trial misconduct by failing to request the trial court to admonish the jury to disregard such misconduct? (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)
Does a deputy district attorney acquiesce in having the motion heard during the trial of a defendant before trial, rather than prior to trial? (California, United States of America)
If appellant had valid grounds to criticize his trial attorney's actions with respect to the Miranda issue, would he have been able to argue that the trial attorney was constitutionally ineffective? (California, United States of America)
When a minor alleges misconduct by a district attorney during a hearing, does the minor have to prove that the district attorney's comments to the minor constitute misconduct? (California, United States of America)
