Court Opinion

ID: 9546878
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 17:37:03.01549+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:16:58.811958
License: Public Domain

HENRIOD, Justice
(dissenting):
Respectfully I dissent. .
The main opinion asserts that the question anent an additur as a condition for a new trial, is moot, because a new trial was granted. In my opinion there is no such mootness, but that the granting of a new trial based on such conditional additur is the most important factor in this case,— else the result would have been antithetical.
The additur maneuver, in my opinion, clearly is an invasion of the traditional and historical function of the jury, as is clearly expressed in Dimick v. Scheidt, 293 U.S. 474, 55 S.Ct. 296, 79 L.Ed. 603, 95 A.L.R. 1150 (1935), which so far as I know, yet has not been reversed.