Excessive Damages Inadequate

• Dawson Et Al. v. Fulton-Dekalb Hospital Authority., 236 Ga. App. 96, 511 S.E.2d 199 (1999)

Robinson makes it clear that a jury verdict in a comparative negligence case may be reviewed by the trial court and that a new trial may be awarded under OCGA 51-12-12 (b) \"[i]f the jury\'s award of damages is clearly so inadequate or so excessive as to any party as to be inconsistent with the preponderance of the evidence.\" The trial court did not have the opportunity to rule on Dawson\'s motion for new trial under this standard, and we cannot ascertain from the trial court\'s order whether its decision was colored by the old comparative negligence case rule delineated in Kirkland. Accordingly, since the trial judge attended the trial and heard all the evidence, we believe it is prudent to let the trial judge reconsider her ruling on Dawson\'s motion for new trial in light...

• Georgia Court Of Appeals

• Commentary: Trials & Tribulations: Excessive Additur

Following a jury trial in a negligence action, a trial court may set aside the verdict on the ground that the award is either excessive or inadequate and "deviates materially from what would be reasonable compensation," see CPLR 5501 (c); Prunty v. YMCA of Lockport, Inc., 206 AD2d 911, 912 (Fourth Dept. 1994). Upon setting aside the verdict, the trial court may order a new trial on damages "unless" the defendant stipulates to increased damages ("additur") or the plaintiff stipulates to reduced damages ("remittitur"), see CPLR 5501(c); Siegel, NY Prac [section]407, at 713 (5th ed.). With regard to an additur, the damages assessed by the trial court must represent the "minimum amount[s] that the jury could have found as a matter of law based on the evidence at trial," Camacho v. Rocheste...

• Daily Record (Rochester, NY)
• September 08, 2011

• Ava Wales v. City of Zachary, (5th Cir. 2010)

... as a matter of law, and contests the damages award as excessive. Because the City failed to ren... jury award of damages as excessive or inadequate without a trial court ruling on remittitur ”); B...

• Federal Circuits

• The Expedited Jury Trials Act: An Alternative To Form Arbitration Clauses

... liability and imposing liquidated damages, even if only for specified types of disputes. T... judgment, and for new trial based upon inadequate or excessive damages. 7. Cal. Code Civ. Proc. §...

• Mondaq Business Briefing
• United States Law Articles in English

• Hetzel v. Prince William County, 523 U.S. 208 (per curiam) (1998)

... 1964, but the District Court reduced the damages to $500,000. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the liabi... set aside the damages award as grossly excessive and remanded for recalculation. The District Court... a verdict is set aside as grossly inadequate or excessive, both parties remain entitled to have...

• U.S. Supreme Court

• Weber v. Kinnen, (Ohio 2011)

NEW TRIAL: The amount of a jury award alone will not sustain a finding of passion or prejudice under Civ.R. 59(A)(4). Where the evidence of pain-and-suffering damages was controverted at trial, and credible evidence supported the jury’s award for such damages, the trial court abused its discretion in granting a new trial for inadequate damages under Civ.R. 59(A)(6). [But, see, DISSENT: The trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting a new trial for inadequate pain-and-suffering damages given the nominal award.]

• Ohio Supreme Court

• The Expedited Jury Trials Act: An Alternative To Form Arbitration Clauses.

... liability and imposing liquidated damages, even if only for specified types of disputes. . T... judgment, and for new trial based upon inadequate or excessive damages. . 7. Cal. Code Civ. Proc. s....

• Mondaq Business Briefing
• Nbr. 2011, January 2011

• Pacific Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Haslip, 499 U.S. 1 (1991)

... insurer, respondents filed an action for damages in state court, claiming fraud by Ruffin and seeki...The majority held that the Excessive Fines Clause of the Eighth Amendment did not apply... whether the award was excessive or inadequate: (a) whether there is a reasonable relationship be...

• U.S. Supreme Court

• Cooper v. Moran, (Ohio 2011)

CIVIL - personal injury; no dispute on liability; new trial; Civ.R. 59; inadequate damages; weight of the evidence; contrary to law; general verdict; interrogatories; economic damages; no pain and suffering awarded; evidence of suffering; dispositive medical testimony; no de minimis.

• Ohio Supreme Court

• Innovative Technologies Corp. v. Advanced Mgt. Technology, Inc., (Ohio 2011)

Trial court did not err when it overruled appellant/cross-appellee’s motion for summary judgment, motion for directed verdict, motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, and motion for new trial. Sufficient evidence was adduced in the record which established that appellee/cross-appellant would have won a government contract in August of 2001 but for the tortious conduct of appellant/cross-appellee. Trial court did not abuse its discretion when it granted appellant’s motion for remittitur regarding compensatory and punitive damages awarded by the jury. Ratio of 2.96:1 for punitive and compensatory damages was appropriate and not unconstitutionally excessive. Trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding attorneys’ fees to appellee’s counsel. Nature, duration, and compl...

• Ohio Supreme Court