Kitagawa v. Williams

California Court of Appeal Feb 19, 1959 No. Civ. 5905Published

Before: Stone

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the order granting a new trial on damages only was improper because it effectively reversed a jury verdict of non-liability without proper procedural basis, and that the underlying judgments must be reversed because the jury's damage awards, which deviated from stipulated amounts, constituted an unsupported compromise verdict.

Issues

Whether the trial court erred in granting a new trial on the issue of damages only against a party found not liable by the jury.
Whether a jury verdict that deviates from stipulated damages without other supporting evidence constitutes an invalid compromise verdict.

Disposition. reversed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The effect of the order granting a new trial against Kitagawa as to damages only is to reverse the judgment and find Kitagawa conclusively liable.”

“The trial court had no authority to enter a judgment contrary to the verdict of the jury on a motion for a new trial in the absence of a motion for a directed verdict and a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict.”

“Hence we conclude that the jury reached its verdicts as the result of compromise.”

STONE, J. pro tem.

George Kitagawa was driving his automobile in a southerly direction on United States Highway 99 in the vicinity of Thermal, California, on February 9, 1955, at approximately 4 a. m. At this point Highway 99 is a two-lane thoroughfare, one lane for northbound traffic and the other for southbound. Just prior to the accident which gave rise to this litigation Kitagawa had slowed his vehicle for the purpose of making a left turn to enter a side road. As Kitagawa slowed his vehicle he observed approaching from the south a tractor-trailer unit owned and operated by Pacific Union Association of Seventh Day Adventists, a corporation, doing business as Loma Linda Food Company, and hereinafter referred to as Loma Linda. Following Kitagawa and also traveling in a southerly direction was a vehicle driven and operated by Benton F. Williams. The Williams vehicle struck the Kitagawa vehicle in the rear and shoved it across the center line and into the path of the northbound Loma Linda truck.

Kitagawa filed a complaint naming Williams and Loma Linda as defendants. Williams filed a cross-complaint against Kitagawa and Loma Linda. In turn, Loma Linda filed a cross-complaint naming Kitagawa and Williams as cross-defendants. At the trial no claim was made for damages by reason of personal injuries and the only evidence concerning damages as to all three vehicles was the following stipulation:

[125]

“Mb. Staples: With the presenting of this stipulation, which I think should probably be in the record, I will conclude the case for Loma Linda; and that is the stipulation regarding the damage to the respective vehicles which Counsel have joined in. The damage to the Loma Linda equipment or vehicle was $12,912.75, and an additional item of loss of use damage for that equipment was $1500.00. The damage as to the Kitagawa vehicle was $945.04. The damage to the Williams vehicle was $1263.14. Those items of damage to those vehicles and those parties have been stipulated to.

“The Cotjbt: You join in the stipulation

“Mb. Pendleton: Yes.

“Mb. McGubl: Yes, I believe my office did. I didn’t personally. I go along with the stipulation.

Kitagawa v. Williams

AI Brief

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief