A Philadelphia judge ordered a new trial on damages in a run-of-the-mill automobile collision case in which cable giant Comcast Corp. is a defendant because the judge said the plaintiff’s lawyer “emphasized the race of the plaintiff and the financial and economic disparity between the plaintiff and Comcast” and the lawyer for Comcast’s co-defendant also emphasized the economic disparity.
But Philadelphia Common Pleas Court Judge Marlene Lachman said in a Dec. 22 opinion, explaining to the Superior Court her reasons for ordering a new trial on damages but not liability, that a new trial was not necessary on liability because there was sufficient evidence to support the jury’s finding.
This content has been archived.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]
