When San Diego County Superior Court Judge John Einhorn polled jurors for their votes in a wrongful-death case, he forgot to get one man's answer on two of 13 questions. What might not seem like a big deal was, leading to a California Supreme Court oral argument to decide whether the judge's error -- which went unnoticed by counsel on either side -- requires a new trial. Plaintiffs lawyers, who oppose a new trial, argue that a defense victory in the high court could lead to unwarranted reversals in future cases.
February 27, 2009 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.Com
When San Diego County Superior Court Judge John Einhorn polled jurors for their votes in a wrongful-death case in 2006, he forgot to get one man’s answer on two of 13 questions.
That might not seem like a big deal, but it was, leading to a California Supreme Court oral argument Tuesday to decide whether the judge’s error — which wasn’t noticed by counsel on either side at the time — requires a new trial.
Presented by BigVoodoo
Law firms & in-house legal departments with a presence in the middle east celebrate outstanding achievement within the profession.
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
Atlanta s John Marshall Law School is seeking to hire one or more full-time, visiting Legal WritingInstructors to teach Legal Research, Anal...
Shipman is seeking an associate to join our Labor & Employment practice in our Hartford, New Haven, or Stamford office. Candidates shou...
Lower Manhattan firm seeks a premises liability litigator (i.e., depositions, SJ motions, and/or trials) with at least 3-6 years of experien...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
