Essay #902 Rules

Question 1

Must a judge grant a new trial if a jury verdict is not unanimous?

Answer 1

In Virginia a jury verdict must be unanimous, and such a verdict must be read in open court.

Thus, the dissent of one juror is enough to set aside the verdict.

Question 2

What aspects of juror conduct may a court investigate?

Answer 2

A court may inquire about juror conduct and conversations outside the jury room but cannot question jurors about misconduct inside the jury room.

Question 3

When may a court grant a new trial due to a juror’s improper conversation?

Answer 3

If a juror has an improper conversation with a litigant or someone close to that litigant, the court has discretion to grant a new trial in the interest of justice.

A new trial is warranted only if the conversation likely influenced the jury’s deliberations significantly.

Question 4

What are the 7 common grounds for granting a motion for a new trial?

Answer 4

A court may grant a motion for a new trial if:

(PW) 1. The jury verdict is plainly wrong

(NCE) 2. The jury verdict is unsupported by credible evidence.

3. The judge improperly comments on witness credibility or the weight of evidence.
4. The judge improperly admits or excludes evidence.
5. The judge gives improper jury instructions.

(M) 6. Misconduct occurs by a party, lawyer, juror, or third party,

or

(NDE) 7. There is newly discovered evidence.

Question 5

“Penguins Wear Nice Cozy Earmuffs,
Judging Street Cred. With Evidence, Improperly. Mischief Occurs in the NUDE.”

Answer 5

This represents:

1.Plainly wrong
2. No credible evidence
3. Judge on credibility
4. Judge improperly excludes evidence
5. Judge gives improper instructions
6. Misconduct
7. New evidence

Question 6

What are the 4 requirements for granting a new trial based on newly discovered evidence?

Answer 6

To grant a new trial for newly discovered evidence, the evidence must:

1.Be discovered after the trial,

2. Not have been obtainable before or during the trial with reasonable diligence,
3. Not be merely cumulative, corroborative, or collateral,

and

4. Be material and likely to produce a different result in a new trial.

Question 7

What is the standard for determining whether a jury verdict is excessive?

Answer 7

A verdict is considered excessive if it “shocks the conscience” of the court or is not the product of a “fair and impartial decision”.

Question 8

What factors may indicate that a jury verdict is excessive?

Answer 8

A verdict may be excessive if the damages awarded:
1. greatly exceed the evidence presented,
2. are influenced by improper considerations,
OR
3. lack a fair and impartial basis.

Question 9

What is the standard for awarding punitive damages?

Answer 9

Punitive damages are available if the defendant acted with
1. actual malice or
2. under circumstances amounting to a willful and wanton disregard of the plaintiff’s rights.

Question 10

What options does a court have if a jury verdict is found to be excessive?

Answer 10

The court may:
1. grant a new trial

or

2. use remittitur to reduce the award and require the parties to accept it.
   If either party refuses, the court can then grant a new trial.

Question 11

What is remittitur? (Remit)-titur

Answer 11

Remittitur is the process by which a court reduces an excessive jury award to a reasonable amount and gives the parties the option to accept the reduced award or proceed to a new trial.

Question 12

What discretion does a court have when granting a new trial for an excessive verdict?

Answer 12

The court may grant a new trial on damages alone, liability alone, or both damages and liability, depending on the circumstances.

Question 13

When might a court grant a new trial solely on the issue of damages?

Answer 13

A court may grant a new trial solely on damages when liability is not in dispute, and the excessive verdict pertains only to the damages awarded.