Redepenning v. Dore

The defendants-appellants contend:

1. The verdict should be set aside and a new trial granted because (a) the verdict is contrary to the evidence; (b) the verdict is perverse as a result of passion and prejudice; and (c) it is required in the interest of justice.

2. The jury awards in several questions on damages are excessive and should be reduced with an option of a new trial to plaintiffs-respondents.

In Powers v. Allstate Ins. Co. (1960), 10 Wis. 2d 78, 91, 92, 102 N. W. 2d 393, we said, “. . . where an excessive verdict is not due to perversity or prejudice, and is not the result of error…