Luchok v. Vena

In this automobile accident case the jury returned a verdict in an amount significantly below the damages claimed by Plaintiff. The trial judge granted Plaintiffs motion for a new trial nisi additur, but failed to state compelling reasons for doing so. Our court addressed this specific situation on indistinguishable facts in Green v. Fritz, 356 S.C. 566, 590 S.E.2d 39 (Ct.App.2003). As we did in Green, we reverse and reinstate the jury verdict. 1

Kathryn Luchok sued Rebecca Vena for damages resulting from a rear-end collision. Vena admitted that her negligence caused the accident but disputed…