A court does have the authority to overrule the verdict of a jury in any matter except the acquittal of a criminal defendant. There are three court rules, 50, 59 and 60 specifically deal with this authority. These rules are from the United States Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; however most state court rules are modeled after the Federal Rules; therefor all states in the United States have similar provisions.

Note that judgments are not entered until after the jury hands down its verdict. Thus, when the rule refers to a judgment, it does include judgments that are based on jury verdicts. In this sense the court is setting aside the jury's verdict. The "court" referred to is the trial court, not the Appellate Court, because these rules are not in the separate section for Rules of Appellate Procedure.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50 allows a court to disregard the jury's verdict and either order a new trial or direct the entry of a judgment contrary to the verdict of the jury if the other party is entitled to such a verdict as a matter of law.

This rule gives a court the power to set aside a jury verdict either immediately after it is returned or upon request within 28 days after the verdict is returned. This happens sometimes if a jury returns a verdict that is clearly against the weight of the evidence and should never have been returned. This might happen if a jury is prejudiced against one party or another or makes a mistake in its fact finding conclusions and brings back a verdict that is not supported by the evidence. The court has the authority to disregard the verdict and direct the entry of judgment for the other party notwithstanding the verdict.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59 allows the court to set aside the verdict and judgment and either order a new trial or alter or amend part of the verdict/judgment. The court has this authority if it believes such action is warranted even if none of the parties asks it to do so.

This rule permits alteration or amendment of a judgment as opposed to the grant of an entirely new trial. One example of an alteration or amendment of a verdict/judgment is that a court may reduce or increase the amount of damages a jury awards. This is called remititur and additur, repectively. If a jury awards damages in so excessive an amount that it is clear the the jury was prejudiced or mistaken, the court may lower the amount after the jury verdict is in.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60 also permits the court to relieve a party from the effects of a verdict/judgment under these circumstances:

(1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect;

(2) newly discovered evidence that, with reasonable diligence, could not have been discovered in time to move for a new trial under Rule 59(b);

(3) fraud (whether previously called intrinsic or extrinsic), misrepresentation, or misconduct by an opposing party;

(4) the judgment is void;

(5) the judgment has been satisfied, released, or discharged; it is based on an earlier judgment that has been reversed or vacated; or applying it prospectively is no longer equitable; or

(6) any other reason that justifies relief.

For these reasons and only under the appropriate circumstances, a court does have the authority to throw out, alter,amend or grant some type of relief from a jury verdict and subsequent judgment.

Resources

Top Categories

Product

Company