Legal Opinion

Medo v. Superior Court

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 13, 1988No. A042643PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

ANDERSON, P. J.

This petition raises the question of whether the issue of punitive damages may be tried to a jury which has not determined the liability of the defendant. We conclude that a bifurcation which results in separate juries is prohibited by Civil Code section 3295, subdivision (d). (All further statutory references are to the Civil Code unless otherwise indicated.) We also conclude, however, that real party waived the application of this section and that, therefore, the trial court erred in requiring a retrial of the liability issue. We issue our writ of mandate to require…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Cobb v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1979
  2. People v. Superior Court (Clements)California Court of Appeal · 1988

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Bullock v. Phillip Morris USA, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2008
  2. Torres v. Automobile Club of Southern CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1997
  3. Notrica v. State Compensation Insurance FundCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999
  4. Abelson v. National Union Fire InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994
  5. Barmas, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API