The following excerpt is from Magarrell v. Mangis, NO. CIV. S-04-2634 LKK/DAD P (E.D. Cal. 2012):
To determine the prejudicial effect of attorney misconduct, courts look to the totality of the circumstances, weighing factors such as the "nature of the comments, their frequency, their possible relevancy to the real issue before the jury, the manner in which the parties and the court treated the comments, the strength of the case, and the verdict itself." Hemmings v. Tidyman's Inc. 285 F.3d 1174, 1193 (9th Cir. 2002)(internal quotations omitted). The judge's "prompt corrective action in response to improper comments usually is sufficient to cure any problems arising from such improper comments." U.S. v. Washington, 462 F.3d 1124, 1136 (9th Cir. 2006).
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.