The shakeout from a state Supreme Court precedent that set guidelines for handling remittitur motions is not good news for plaintiffs, as a pair of recent rulings illustrates.
In He v. Miller, 207 N.J. 230 (2011), the court held that the motion judge must allow each side to raise relevant precedents in similar cases for the purpose of comparison, and the judge must explain on the record which cases impacted the remittitur decision and how.
This content has been archived.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]
