A state appeals court improperly substituted its judgment for that of the trial judge and jury when it cut by 90 percent a $500,000 verdict for a competitive equestrian injured in a car crash, the Supreme Court ruled Tuesday.
The unanimous opinion, in Jastram v. Kruse , A-98-07, reinstates the verdict and puts appeals courts on notice that second-guessing juries and trial judges simply due to the size of verdicts will be frowned on.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
