Legal Opinion
Grail Semiconductor, Inc. v. Mitsubishi Electric & Electronics USA, Inc.
California Court of Appeal
Decided April 22, 2014No. H038714PublishedCited by 21 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
ELIA, J.
After a jury reached a verdict in favor of plaintiff Grail Semiconductor, Inc. (Grail), on Grail’s action for breach of contract, the trial court ordered a new trial on damages, at the request of defendant Mitsubishi Electric & Electronics USA, Inc. (Mitsubishi). Both parties appeal. Mitsubishi contends that (1) the court should have ordered judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV) instead of a new trial because Grail failed to establish the element of damages, and (2) the court should at least have granted a new trialon liability for breach of contract because it had…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Intel Corp. v. HamidiCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003
- Horsford v. Board of Trustees of California State UniversityCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
- Celeritas Technologies, Ltd., Plaintiff/cross-Appellant v. Rockwell International CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1998
- Sweatman v. Department of Veterans AffairsCalifornia Supreme Court · 2001
- Jazayeri v. MaoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- IIG Wireless, Inc. v. Yi, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
- In re ABM Indus. Overtime Cases, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
- Trolan v. Trolan, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2019
- Lofton v. Wells Fargo Home Mortg., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
- S.H. v. M.M. (In re C.E.), California Court of Appeal, 5th District2019
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.