Court Opinion

ID: 9937214
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-09 19:00:57.938624+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:34:54.562771
License: Public Domain

This is a proper case for additur; see my opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part in Clements v. Lanley HeatProcessing Equipment, 548 So.2d 1345 (Ala. 1989). I am persuaded that the verdicts were inadequate to compensate Letha and Donny Thompson. I would not affirm the judgment. Rather, I would reverse the judgment and remand the cause for a new trial against Cooper. In my opinion, however, it would be best to condition the grant of that new trial on Cooper's refusal to accept an additur of damages in an amount that would bring the award within the minimum bounds of reason as determined by this Court or, alternatively, as determined by the trial court (see Chief Justice Hornsby's opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part in Clements, supra) after a thorough review of the evidence.