The defendants brought a motion seeking an order bifurcating a jury trial so that liability would be tried first and damages later in a motor vehicle accident action involving catastrophic brain injury and complex insurance coverage issues.
The court held it lacked jurisdiction to bifurcate liability and damages where a valid jury notice had been delivered and the parties did not consent, relying on binding Court of Appeal authority.
The court further noted that even if jurisdiction existed, bifurcation would risk duplicative evidence, inconsistent findings, additional delay and cost, and could undermine settlement incentives.
The motion was dismissed and costs were awarded to the responding plaintiff.
