Court Opinion

ID: 9675164
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 04:43:42.932306+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:15:42.310788
License: Public Domain

On Appellees’ Motion for Rehearing
Appellees urge that we erred in holding that jury misconduct occurred and it was harmful.
We adhere to the holdings originally made.
Alternatively, appellees urge that since the misconduct occurred only in connection with the damage issues after the jury had: answered all other issues, we have a case of the verdict being excessive and this can be cured by remittitur. Appellees offer a remittitur and urge that the judgment of the trial court should, upon the filing of a remittitur, be reformed and affirmed.
The suggestion is not unappealing to us. We find, however, on briefing the matter, that under the facts of this case, the Supreme Court, through the Commission of Appeals, in City of Waco v. Darnell, 35 S.W.2d 134, holds that remittitur will not *285remove the taint of the misconduct present here. See also Union Bus Lines v. Moulder, Tex.Civ.App., 180 S.W.2d 509, no writ hist.
The motion for rehearing is overruled.