(a) Separate trial of an issue When a factual issue raised by the pleadings is tried by the court separately and before the trial of other issues, the judge conducting the separate trial must announce the tentative decision on the issue so tried and must, when requested under Code of Civil Procedure section 632, issue a statement of decision as prescribed in rule 3.1590; but the court must not prepare any proposed judgment until the other issues are tried, except when an interlocutory judgment or a separate judgment may otherwise be properly entered at that time. (Subd (a) amended and lettered effective January 1, 2007; adopted as part of untitled subd.)
Rule 3.1591.Statement of decision, judgment, and motion for new trial following bifurcated trial
Division 15. Trial · Chapter 9. Statement of Decision · Last amended 2007 · Last verified July 29, 2026
In one sentenceRule 3.1591 adapts the statement-of-decision process to bifurcated trials, letting a court try and decide one issue before the rest, requiring each judge in a multi-judge bifurcation to handle the statement of decision for the issues that judge tried, and holding new-trial motions until every issue has been tried.
Full Text of Rule 3.1591
(b) Trial of issues by a different judge If the other issues are tried by a different judge or judges, each judge must perform all acts required by rule 3.1590 as to the issues tried by that judge and the judge trying the final issue must prepare the proposed judgment. (Subd (b) amended and lettered effective January 1, 2007; adopted as part of untitled subd.)
(c) Trial of subsequent issues before issuance of statement of decision A judge may proceed with the trial of subsequent issues before the issuance of a statement of decision on previously tried issues. Any motion for a new trial following a bifurcated trial must be made after all the issues are tried and, if the issues were tried by different judges, each judge must hear and determine the motion as to the issues tried by that judge. (Subd (c) amended and lettered effective January 1, 2007; adopted as part of untitled subd.)
Plain-English Summary
Bifurcation splits a single case into separate trials on separate issues, often to resolve a threshold question, such as liability, before spending time and money on damages. Rule 3.1591 fits the statement-of-decision procedure around that structure rather than forcing every bifurcated case back into a single-trial mold.
When a judge tries one issue separately and ahead of the rest, that judge still announces a tentative decision and, if a party requests it, issues a statement of decision on that issue following the same procedure as an ordinary bench trial. What the judge cannot do yet is prepare a full proposed judgment, since the case is not over, unless an interlocutory or separate judgment on that issue is independently proper at that point. If a different judge later tries the remaining issues, that second judge follows the same statement-of-decision steps for the issues assigned, and it falls to whichever judge tries the last issue to put together the proposed judgment for the whole case.
The rule also settles timing for a new trial motion. A court can move ahead and try later issues before finishing the statement of decision on earlier ones, but a motion for new trial cannot be filed until every issue in the bifurcated case has been tried. If more than one judge handled different issues, each judge rules on the new trial motion only as to the issues that judge tried.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does a bifurcated trial in California follow the same statement-of-decision rule as a regular trial?
Largely yes. Rule 3.1591(a) applies the Rule 3.1590 procedure to each separately tried issue, but bars a full proposed judgment until the remaining issues are tried, absent an interlocutory or separate judgment.
What happens if different judges try different issues in a bifurcated case?
Each judge follows Rule 3.1590 for the issues that judge tried, and the judge who tries the final issue prepares the proposed judgment, under Rule 3.1591(b).
When can a party move for a new trial after a bifurcated trial?
Only after all the issues have been tried, under Rule 3.1591(c). If different judges tried different issues, each judge decides the new trial motion as to the issues that judge handled.
Amendment History
Rule 3.1591 amended and renumbered effective January 1, 2007; adopted as rule 232.5 effective January 1, 1975; previously amended effective January 1, 1982, and January 1, 1985.
Source & verification. Rule text is reproduced verbatim from
the Judicial Council of California. Adopted by the Judicial Council of California.
Last verified July 29, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as: bifurcated trial statement of decision Californianew trial motion after bifurcated trialCRC rule 3.1591