Understanding Post-Trial Remedies in California Civil Litigation

The conclusion of a trial does not necessarily mark the end of the litigation. California law provides several post-trial procedures that permit parties to challenge verdicts, judgments, and appealable orders before pursuing appellate review.

These motions serve different purposes, are governed by different standards, and often affect appellate deadlines under California Rules of Court 8.104 and 8.108.

Understanding the available post-trial remedies is critical because many post-trial motions must be filed within short and jurisdictional time limits.

This article summarizes the principal post-trial motions available in California civil litigation and the standards courts apply when deciding them.

Motion for New Trial (Code of Civil Procedure section 657)

A motion for new trial asks the court to vacate a verdict or decision and conduct a new trial.

California courts possess broad discretion to grant new trials, but only on grounds expressly authorized by statute.

Grounds for New Trial

Section 657 identifies several grounds, including:

• Irregularity in the proceedings;

• Jury misconduct;

• Accident or surprise;

• Newly discovered evidence;

• Excessive or inadequate damages;

• Insufficiency of the evidence; and

• Error in law occurring at trial.

Excessive or Inadequate Damages

The court determines whether the damages award appears to have resulted from:

• passion;

• prejudice;

• corruption; or

• a verdict unsupported by the evidence.

Legal Error

The moving party generally must establish:

• legal error occurred; and

• the error was prejudicial.

Timing

A notice of intention to move for new trial must ordinarily be filed within:

• 15 days after service of notice of entry; or

• 180 days after entry of judgment.

Effect on Appeal Deadline

A valid motion for new trial extends the deadline to appeal under Rule 8.108(b). Click here to learn more about extending the deadline to appeal.

Motion for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict (JNOV)(Code of Civil Procedure section 629)

A motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict requests entry of judgment in favor of the moving party despite the jury's verdict.

Unlike a new trial motion, JNOV does not seek a second trial.

It seeks outright judgment.

Standard Applied

The standard is highly deferential.

The court asks:

Is there substantial evidence supporting the verdict?

The court:

• views the evidence favorably to the prevailing party;

• draws all reasonable inferences supporting the verdict; and

• does not weigh credibility.

JNOV is appropriate only where:

No substantial evidence supports the verdict.

Timing

Must generally be filed before expiration of the court's jurisdiction over a new trial motion.

Effect on Appeal Deadline

A valid JNOV motion extends the appeal deadline under Rule 8.108(d). Click here to learn more about extending the deadline to appeal.

Motion to Vacate Judgment (Code of Civil Procedure sections 473 and 663)

Several distinct motions fall within this category.

Each involves different standards.

Motion Under CCP §473(b)

Section 473(b) permits relief for:

• mistake;

• inadvertence;

• surprise; or

• excusable neglect.

Standard

Courts examine whether:

A reasonably prudent person under similar circumstances might have committed the same error.

California courts favor decisions on the merits and frequently construe section 473 liberally.

Attorney Affidavit of Fault

Mandatory relief may be available when:

• an attorney submits an affidavit accepting fault; and

• the statute applies.

Motion Under CCP §473.5

Section 473.5 applies when service did not result in:

actual notice in time to defend.

Standard

The moving party must demonstrate:

• lack of actual notice; and

• absence of inexcusable neglect or avoidance of service.

Motion Under CCP §473(d)

Section 473(d) permits courts to vacate:

void judgments.

Examples include:

• defective service;

• lack of jurisdiction;

• judgments exceeding relief demanded.

Standard

The issue is legal rather than discretionary.

Courts examine whether:

The judgment is void on its face or void as a matter of law.

Motion Under CCP §663

Section 663 allows correction of judgments that are:

legally inconsistent with the findings or verdict.

Examples include:

• erroneous conclusions of law;

• judgments unsupported by factual findings.

Standard

The court determines whether:

the judgment is legally erroneous based upon undisputed findings.

Effect on Appeal Deadline

Certain valid motions to vacate extend the appeal deadline under Rule 8.108(c). Click here to learn more about extending the deadline to appeal.

Motion for Reconsideration (Code of Civil Procedure section 1008)

Reconsideration is available only under limited circumstances.

The statute is narrowly construed.

Standard

The moving party must demonstrate:

• new facts;

• new circumstances; or

• new law.

Timing

Must generally be filed within:

10 days after service of written notice of entry.

Effect on Appeal Deadline

A valid reconsideration motion may extend appellate deadlines under Rule 8.108(e).

Strategic Considerations

Many post-trial motions serve dual purposes.

They may:

• preserve issues for appeal;

• create a more favorable appellate record;

• provide the trial court an opportunity to correct error;

• extend appellate deadlines under Rule 8.108.

However, parties should exercise caution.

Not every motion extends the deadline to appeal.

Only valid motions recognized by Rule 8.108 provide an extension.

Because appellate deadlines are jurisdictional, reliance upon an invalid motion can be catastrophic.

Early consultation with appellate counsel can often help identify the most effective post-trial strategy.

Contact Decker Law

Decker Law represents clients throughout California in family law appeals, property division appeals, post-judgment enforcement proceedings, and other complex appellate matters. If you are considering an appeal involving community property, real estate division, or a family court accounting dispute, contact Decker Law to discuss your appellate options.