An appellate court may reverse a verdict if it believes that the trial judge has erred in interpreting or applying the law, or if it decides that there is a compelling reason to overturn precedent established by lower courts. If the trial court verdict is partially or entirely reversed, the appeals court may remand the case back to the lower court for retrial. In such a case, the trial court judge is bound to follow the rulings of the appellate court. This may result in a different verdict, though of course the jury is free to render whatever verdict it thinks right. At any point in the trial or appeal process, the parties in a civil case may decide by mutual agreement to reach a settlement.
Settlements avoid the time and expense of further court action.
The case descriptions in this book are excerpted from those sections of the opinions, generally near the beginning, in which the judge or judges hearing the appeal summarize the facts of the case before beginning their legal analyses. These analyses have been omitted from the case descriptions in the text, although sections of them show up in the case law accompanying a set of readings in a group. This is an intentional omission made to avoid biasing your responses to the facts of a given case. If you know in advance what the appellate court decided, there is a strong possibility that you might adopt that conclusion as your own and tailor your reasoning to support the court's decision. If, on the other hand, you don't know how the court ruled, then the question of whether the plaintiff or the defendant has a stronger case becomes a much more open one.