Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Dunkin v. Smith

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided January 16, 1987No. 85-1128Published

1ConcurrenceHouston, Justice

Normally, when no reason is given by the trial court for granting a new trial and one of the grounds is that the verdict is contrary to the evidence, we assume that it was granted because the trial court concluded that the verdict was contrary to the great weight or great preponderance of the evidence or that the verdict was unjust in the light of the evidence. Little v. Pate, 388 So.2d 941, 942 (Ala.1980). Such an assumption could trigger the new trial standard recently announced in Jawad v. Granade, 497 So.2d 471 (Ala.1986). To avoid this, it is preferable for the trial court to state its…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Jawad v. GranadeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1986
  2. Little v. PateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1980

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API