Head v. CSX Transportation, Inc.

I agree that the lower court reinstatement of the jury verdict and the judgment entered thereon should be affirmed, but upon a somewhat different analysis than presented in the majority opinion.

The dissent is correct that the excessiveness or inadequacy of an amount awarded in a verdict is initially a question of fact when raised in a motion for new trial to the trial judge. “An excessive or *471inadequate verdict constitutes a mistake of fact rather than of law. It addresses itself to the discretion of the trial judge who saw the witnesses and heard the testimony.”4 “[W]here no prejudice or bias…