Wedmore v. Jordan Motors, Inc.
Indiana Court of Appeals
1DissentBarteau, Judge
In granting Jordan Motors's motion to correct error, the trial judge presented Wedmore with a choice between repeating the trial or accepting a 95% remittitur of the jury's punitive damages award, while explaining little more than that the amount was "ridiculous." Although "[jJudges need not explain the obvious, even briefly," United States v. Beasley (1987), 7th Cir., 809 F.2d 1273, 1280, I cannot agree that the trial judge's explanation complied with Ind.Trial Rule 59(J)(7). As our supreme court has observed, "if the [trial] court overrides the jury in its special domain and substitutes its…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- United States v. Marvin Leo BeasleyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1987
- Nissen Trampoline Co. v. Terre Haute First National BankIndiana Supreme Court · 1976
- State v. WhiteIndiana Supreme Court · 1985
- Burell v. RiggsIndiana Court of Appeals · 1990
- Wedge v. Lipps Industries, Inc.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1991
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.