What is the test for setting aside evidence in a civil case?

Evidence Code section 353 provides: "A verdict or finding shall not be set aside, nor shall the judgment or decision based thereon be reversed, by reason of the erroneous admission of evidence unless . . . the error or errors complained of resulted in a miscarriage of justice." In civil cases, a miscarriage of justice should be declared only when the reviewing court, after an examination of the entire cause, including the evidence, finds it reasonably probable the jury would have reached a result more favorable to the appealing party in the absence of the alleged error. (Pool v. City of Oakland (1986) 42 Cal.3d 1051, 1069.)

Government Code section 835, subdivision (b), provides that "a public entity is liable for injury caused by a dangerous condition of its property if the plaintiff establishes that the property was in a dangerous condition at the time of the injury, that the injury was proximately caused by the dangerous condition, that the dangerous condition created a reasonably foreseeable risk of the kind of injury which was incurred, and . . . [t]he public entity had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition . . . ." "A 'dangerous condition' is a condition of public property that creates a substantial risk of injury to members of the general public when the property is . . . used with reasonable care and in a reasonably foreseeable manner. . . ." (CACI No. 1102.) The requirement that a plaintiff show the property was in a dangerous condition at the time of the injury exists independent of any third party conduct. As noted in Salas v. Department of Transportation (2011) 198 Cal.App.4th 1058, " 'it is insufficient to show only harmful third party conduct, like the conduct of a motorist. " '[T]hird party conduct, by itself,

Page 14