Court Opinion

ID: 9596340
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 00:48:33.526712+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:01:35.073733
License: Public Domain

LAWRENCE G. CRAHAN, Judge,
concurring.
I concur fully in Judge Cohen’s comprehensive opinion. It is troubling, however, to reinstate a verdict that the trial judge, who is obviously in the best position to observe, has “substantial doubt” represents the jury’s determination of actual damages only. I write separately simply to observe that the questions of whether the original verdict was ambiguous and whether the trial court should have simply entered judgment for $4.5 million as indicated by the jury in that judgment are not before us in this appeal.1

. Defendants did not file a cross-appeal of the denial of their motion for J.N.O.V. because, under established case law, they were not ‘'aggrieved” by the judgment granting their motion for new trial. See Schlemer v. Connell Agencies of Kimberling City, Inc., 741 S.W.2d 307, 309 (Mo.App.1987).