1.NOTICE OF INTENT TO MOVE FOR NEW TRIAL
Plaintiff Sengmany Sithisombath?s Motion for New Trial on the grounds of irregularity in the proceedings [CCP ?657(1)], insufficient evidence to justify the verdict [CCP ?657(6)] and error of law occurring at trial [CCP ?657(7)] is Denied.
In support the Motion on the ground of CCP ?657(1), plaintiff argues that the Court?s two of the Court?s evidentiary rulings ? not permitting the publication of the California Driver?s Handbook [called ?DMV Manual in the Motion] and exclusion of testimony that defendant Nguyen ?refused? to take a blood alcohol test ? were in error and prevented a fair trial.
No authority has been cited that either of these evidentiary rulings are wrong as a matter of law and the Court has located no such authority.? As such, the Court?s rulings were within its discretion under Evidence Code ?352.? The Court does not find these rulings prevented plaintiff from having a fair trial.
As required by CCP ?657(c), insufficiency of the evidence to justify the verdicct, the Court has reweighed the evidence in this case.? The Court finds the entire record, including reasonable inferences therefrom, does not support the conclusion that the jury clearly should have reached a different conclusion.? .??Cassella v. SouthWest Dealer Services, Inc.?(2007) 157 Cal.App.4th?1127
Finally, on the ground of error of law at trial, CCP ?657(7), the Court concludes that there was no prejudicial error of law.