The plaintiff sought reversal of a defense verdict in medical malpractice suit. He faulted the trial court for failing to investigate allegations of juror misconduct midway through trial and for denying his motion to augment his expert’s declaration. He also challenged a ruling that sustained an objection to his counsel’s question during cross-examination of the Regents’ expert.
The Court of Appeal affirmed the judgment. It found the trial court properly handled the alleged juror misconduct and that there was no prejudice in any event. It also found the trial court acted within its discretion when it denied the motion to augment and sustained the objection.
© 2025 Greines, Martin, Stein & Richland LLP.
All rights reserved. Disclaimer - Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
6420 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1100
Los Angeles, California 90048
p: (310) 859 7811 | f: (310) 276 5261
50 California Street, Suite 1500
San Francisco, CA 94111
p: (415) 315 1774
555 Anton Blvd, Suite 150
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
P: (310) 859-7811
© 2025 Greines, Martin, Stein & Richland LLP.
All rights reserved. Disclaimer - Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
We welcome your inquiry. However, sending us an email does not create an attorney-client relationship. For that reason, you should not send us any kind of confidential information. Until we have agreed to represent you, we cannot be obligated to keep it confidential.