Opinion ID: 4512151
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Post‐Trial

Text: On June 6, 2017, the district court entered judgment, awarding, in addition to the juryʹs award of $15 million in compensatory damages, $5 million in punitive damages (calculated in accordance with Connecticut common law as the amount of attorneysʹ fees, representing one‐third of the juryʹs award)3 as well as $1,749,041.10 in offer‐of‐compromise interest (in accordance with Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52‐192a), for a total award of $21,749,041.10 in favor of Mirlis against Greer and Yeshiva. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(a), Greer and Yeshiva filed a motion for new trial, or in the alternative, for remittitur on June 3 See, e.g., Berry v. Loiseau, 614 A.2d 414, 435 (Conn. 1992) (punitive damages limited to expense of litigation, including attorneysʹ fees, less taxable costs); Waterbury Petroleum Prods., Inc. v. Canaan Oil & Fuel Co., 477 A.2d 988, 1004 (Conn. 1984) (same). - 10 - 28, 2017. They argued that the ʺevidence presented at trial simply cannot support the juryʹs exorbitant verdict in this case, which is dramatically out of step with non‐economic damage awards by juries in cases involving similar claims of sexual abuse, both in Connecticut and throughout the country.ʺ D. Ct. Doc. No. 172 at Attachment #1. Later, on October 27, 2017, Greer and Yeshiva filed a motion for relief from final judgment, pursuant to Rule 60(b)(2), arguing that new evidence in the form of testimony from a former teacher at Yeshiva would undermine the credibility of Mirlis and Hack and would likely have led to a different verdict had it been presented at trial. On December 8, 2017, ruling from the bench, the district court denied both motions. This appeal followed.4