Court Opinion

ID: 6601764
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-07-20 20:08:18.996102+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:58:02.473234
License: Public Domain

Ryan, C. J.
The verdict of the jury was considerably in excess of the amount claimed in the complaint. Something is said in the briefs of counsel on the subject of a remittitur, but there is none in the record, to which alone we can look. The motion for a tiew trial, if denied, should have been denied only upon condition that the respondent enter a remittitur of the excess.
The other grounds set up by the appellant for a new trial went to the discretion of the court below ; and there does not appear to have been an abuse of a sound discretion in the denial of the motion, so far as it rested on those grounds.
But the order of the court below overruling the motion, without making it a condition of the order that the respondent should remit the excess of damages found by the jury, was * erroneous, and must be reversed.
By the Court, — Order reversed.