BILL NUMBER: AB 1403	INTRODUCED
	BILL TEXT


INTRODUCED BY   Committee on Judiciary (Feuer (Chair), Atkins,
Dickinson, Huber, Huffman, Monning, and Wieckowski)

                        MARCH 7, 2011

   An act to amend Sections 222.5 and 662.5 of the Code of Civil
Procedure, relating to civil actions.


	LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST


   AB 1403, as introduced, Committee on Judiciary. Civil actions.
   (1) Existing law requires a trial judge to examine prospective
jurors, and, upon completion of the judge's examination, grants
counsel for each party the right to examine, by oral and direct
questioning, any prospective juror in order to enable counsel to
intelligently exercise peremptory challenges and challenges for
cause. Existing law provides that when examination is conducted by
counsel for the parties, the trial judge should permit liberal and
probing examination calculated to discover bias or prejudice, as
specified.
   This bill would require the trial judge to permit liberal and
probing examination calculated to discover bias or prejudice.
   (2) Existing law authorizes the trial court, in its discretion, in
any civil action where after trial by jury an order granting a new
trial limited to the issue of damages would be proper, to make a
conditional order granting a new trial. If the ground for granting a
new trial is inadequate damages, the order granting the new trial may
be subject to the condition that the motion for a new trial is
denied if the party against whom the verdict has been rendered
consents to an increased verdict, as specified. If the ground for
granting a new trial is excessive damages, the order granting the new
trial may be subject to the condition that the motion for a new
trial is denied if the party in whose favor the verdict has been
rendered consents to a reduction of the verdict, as specified.
   This bill would provide that the deadline for acceptance or
rejection of the addition or reduction of damages is 30 days from the
date the conditional order is issued, if a deadline is not set forth
in the conditional order. The bill would provide that failure to
respond to the order shall be deemed a rejection of the addition or
reduction of damages, and a new trial limited to the issue of damages
shall be granted automatically. The bill would require a party
serving an acceptance of a conditionally ordered addition or
reduction of damages to prepare an amended judgment reflecting the
modified judgment amount, as well as any other uncontested judgment
awards.
   Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: no.
State-mandated local program: no.


THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

  SECTION 1.  Section 222.5 of the Code of Civil Procedure is amended
to read:
   222.5.  To select a fair and impartial jury in civil jury trials,
the trial judge shall examine the prospective jurors. Upon completion
of the judge's initial examination, counsel for each party shall
have the right to examine, by oral and direct questioning, any of the
prospective jurors in order to enable counsel to intelligently
exercise both peremptory challenges and challenges for cause. During
any examination conducted by counsel for the parties, the trial judge
 should   shall  permit liberal and
probing examination calculated to discover bias or prejudice with
regard to the circumstances of the particular case. The fact that a
topic has been included in the judge's examination should not
preclude additional nonrepetitive or nonduplicative questioning in
the same area by counsel.
   The scope of the examination conducted by counsel shall be within
reasonable limits prescribed by the trial judge in the judge's sound
discretion. In exercising his or her sound discretion as to the form
and subject matter of voir dire questions, the trial judge should
consider, among other criteria, any unique or complex elements, legal
or factual, in the case and the individual responses or conduct of
jurors which may evince attitudes inconsistent with suitability to
serve as a fair and impartial juror in the particular case. Specific
unreasonable or arbitrary time limits shall not be imposed.
   The trial judge should permit counsel to conduct voir dire
examination without requiring prior submission of the questions
unless a particular counsel engages in improper questioning. For
purposes of this section, an "improper question" is any question
which, as its dominant purpose, attempts to precondition the
prospective jurors to a particular result, indoctrinate the jury, or
question the prospective jurors concerning the pleadings or the
applicable law. A court should not arbitrarily or unreasonably refuse
to submit reasonable written questionnaires, the contents of which
are determined by the court in its sound discretion, when requested
by counsel.
   In civil cases, the court may, upon stipulation by counsel for all
the parties appearing in the action, permit counsel to examine the
prospective jurors outside a judge's presence.
  SEC. 2.  Section 662.5 of the Code of Civil Procedure is amended to
read:
   662.5.   (a)    In any civil action where after
trial by jury an order granting a new trial limited to the issue of
damages would be proper, the trial court may in its discretion:

   (a) 
    (1)  If the ground for granting a new trial is
inadequate damages, make its order granting the new trial subject to
the condition that the motion for a new trial is denied if the party
against whom the verdict has been rendered consents to an addition of
so much thereto as the court in its independent judgment determines
from the evidence to be fair and reasonable. 
   (b) 
    (2)  If the ground for granting a new trial is excessive
damages, make its order granting the new trial subject to the
condition that the motion for a new trial is denied if the party in
whose favor the verdict has been rendered consents to a reduction of
so much thereof as the court in its independent judgment determines
from the evidence to be fair and reasonable. 
   (b) If a deadline for acceptance or rejection of the addition or
reduction of damages is not set forth in the conditional order, the
deadline is 30 days from the date the conditional order is issued.
Failure to respond to the order in accordance with this section shall
be deemed a rejection of the addition or reduction of damages and a
new trial limited to the issue of damages shall be granted
automatically.  
   (c) A party serving an acceptance of a conditionally ordered
addition or reduction of damages shall prepare an amended judgment
reflecting the modified judgment amount, as well as any other
uncontested judgment awards.