Brown v. Brodsky

evidence of liability for compensatory damages and malice, oppression, or fraud will necessarily involve overlapping evidence and witness testimony. Bifurcating the issue of whether or not defendants’ conduct rises to the level of malice, oppression, or fraud will needlessly waste judicial and jury time by requiring re-litigation of similar facts, conduct, witnesses, and documents regard defendants’ conduct in multiple phases. Any potential confusion to the jury may be solved with jury instructions regarding the different burdens of proof as well as a special verdict.

Bifurcating evidence related to the amount of punitive damages and defendants’ profits or financial condition until after the trier of fact has determined defendants’ liability and plaintiff’s entitlement to punitive damages, in the first, place, balances Defendants’ concerns with efficiency and the policy purposes behind section 3295.

Defendants’ motion to bifurcate trial of punitive damages is granted in part as set forth above.

Moving Defendants to give notice.

31