Erikson v. Weiner
California Court of Appeal
[Opinion certified for partial publication.*]
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
BLEASE, Acting P. J.
This is an appeal from a judgment in favor of plaintiff, Gwendolyn Erikson, after a jury trial in a medical malpractice action.
Defendant, Dr. Barry E. Weiner, contends the trial court erred in denying his motion for a new trial predicated on claims of juror misconduct. In the published portion of the opinion 1 we decide that the provision of Code of Civil Procedure section 659a 2 that the trial court may extend the period within which to file an affidavit in support of a new trial “not exceeding 20 days” is mandatory. Accordingly, we will not consider the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- People v. HutchinsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1969
- Boynton v. McKalesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
- People v. PaciniCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1981
- Siegal v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
- Clemens v. Regents of the University of CaliforniaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Lovejoy v. AT&T CORP.California Court of Appeal · 2001
- Kabran v. Sharp Memorial Hosp.California Supreme Court · 2017
- Hermosa Beach Stop Oil Coalition v. City of Hermosa BeachCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001
- Westrec Marina Management. Inc. v. Jardine Insurance Brokers Orange County, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2000
- L.R. v. A.L.California Court of Appeal · 2012
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.