Legal Opinion

Ex Parte Reed

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided December 15, 1995No. 1941709PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

HOUSTON, Justice.

The writ is denied. We note that where a trial court denies a motion for a new trial premised upon the inadequacy of the verdict amount “[the] jury verdict is presumed to be correct and will not be set aside for an inadequate award of damages unless the amount awarded is so inadequate as to indicate that the verdict is the result of passion, prejudice, or other improper motive.” Helena Chemical Co. v. Ahern, 496 So.2d 12, 14 (Ala.1986). The standard applied by the Court of Civil Appeals, which was whether “the evidence plainly and palpably supports the [jury] verdict,” is the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Helena Chemical Co. v. AhernSupreme Court of Alabama · 1986
  2. Merritt v. RobertsCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1985

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Ex Parte CourtneySupreme Court of Alabama · 2006

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

Powered by the Exa API