P0811 The appropriate way to challenge a trial court's conditional reduction of punitive damages in an order granting a motion for new trial is by appealing the order granting a new trial, rather than by appealing the trial court's denial of defendant's motion for judgment not withstanding the verdict; should there be a new trial on the amount of punitive damages, evidence that had been admissible in the liability phase to justify an award of punitive damages might be inadmissible for determination of the amount, while other such evidence might be admissible as relevant to the reprehensibility of defendant's conduct, which is a factor in determining the amount, and evidence of subsequent misconduct by defendant's employees directed at others than plaintiff might be inadmissible to establish reprehensibility, but might be admissible to impeach any claim by defendant that when it learned of employees' misconduct toward plaintiff, it took steps to prevent further such misconduct.

GOBER v RALPHS (Puni's Retrial) 128 CA4 648 [See: CCP 904.1, 904.2, 657, 902; EvC 352; State Farm v Campbell 538 US 408, T/AT 7/03]