Court Opinion

ID: 9741688
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 21:00:32.083185+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:24:25.477726
License: Public Domain

Fairchild, J.
(dissenting). In my opinion the jury’s answer to the damage question is sustained by the evidence if the testimony is viewed in the light most favorable to Mrs. Boughton’s claim. Where this is the case the trial court may not set aside the answer unless it is of the opinion that such action is required in the interest of justice. In such case the reasons must be set forth in the order.
Even if the damage finding can properly be said not to have been sustained by the evidence, I would prefer that the *623option given to Mrs. Boughton would not be for the lowest amount that a jury would probably assess, but an amount fixed by the trial court as a fair and reasonable award under the evidence. My reasons for this view were stated in an opinion filed in Gennrich v. Schrank (1959), 6 Wis. (2d) 87, 93, 93 N. W. (2d) 876.