Plaintiff employee appealed the order

Procedural Posture

Plaintiff employee appealed the order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County (California), which granted a new trial to defendant employer alleging breach of contract and racial discrimination.

Overview: pros and cons of a joint venture

Plaintiff employee filed a complaint against defendant employer for racial discrimination and breach of contract. The trial court ordered a mistrial on the discrimination claim and entered an interlocutory judgment granting damages to plaintiff on the contract claim. The trial court later granted defendant's motions for judgment not withstanding the verdict and for a new trial on the breach of contract claim. The court reversed its prior decision, which held that the order granting a new trial on the contract cause of action was expressly appealable pursuant to Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 904.1, even though plaintiff's discrimination claim had not been retried. The court dismissed the appeal because there was no final judgment in the action under Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 656 and no aggrieved party under Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 657. The court held that the grant of a new trial, as to certain issues before there had been a final determination of all causes of action and issues in the case was ineffectual, premature, and not appealable under § 904.1. The court declined to treat plaintiff's appeal as a petition for a writ of mandate for the sake of judicial economy.

Outcome

The court dismissed plaintiff employee's appeal as premature because there was no final judgment to review and no aggrieved party. The court held that the order granting a new trial to defendant employer was ineffectual because there had been no final determination of all the issues in plaintiff's lawsuit.