When will a judge grant a motion for a new trial?

California, United States of America


The following excerpt is from Clinkscale v. Germershausen, 145 Cal.App.2d 76, 302 P.2d 23 (Cal. App. 1956):

We are frank to state that in our opinion the record indicates strongly that the evidence preponderates in favor of plaintiffs on the issue of defendant's negligence as well as on the issue of the contributory negligence of plaintiffs, and that in view of the verdict of the jury the case was one in which the trial court might well have granted a new trial. A trial judge in passing upon a motion for a new trial is not bound by the same rules as an appellate court. We quote what was said in Brush v. Pacific Electric Ry., 58 Cal.App. 501, at page 506, 208 P. 997, at page 1000:

Other Questions


Does a motion for a new trial have to be granted because the trial court refused to grant a motion to sever? (California, United States of America)
Does a motion for a new trial have to be granted because the trial court refused to grant a motion to sever? (California, United States of America)
Is there any error in granting a motion for a new trial when the trial judge dies before hearing the motion? (California, United States of America)
Does a motion for a new trial have to be granted because the trial court refused to grant a motion to sever? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for a trial judge to proceed with the trial of a defendant under section 1368 of the California Mental Health Act if the trial judge receives the reports of two psychiatrists? (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 motion for a new trial need to be denied because the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for new trial? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for denying a motion for a new trial on the grounds that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in denying the motion under the first two grounds? (California, United States of America)
Is there any case law where the trial court would have exercised its discretion not to award a motion for damages even if the trial judge was aware of the fact that the motion was being brought before the court? (California, United States of America)
Does a court's specification of reasons for granting a motion for a new trial, which does not state any grounds or reasons for the decision to grant the motion, constitute untimely and void? (California, United States of America)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.