Legal Opinion
Fouse v. Persons
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Decided November 1, 1977No. 75-33PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtRobert W. Hansen, J.
The trial court, as the statute authorizes, 1 set aside the jury verdict “in the interest of justice.” As the statute requires, 2 the trial court stated its reasons for setting aside the verdict and granting a new trial as follows:
“[T]he jury failed to follow the Court’s instructions in its answers to the damage questions, that the verdict is inconsistent, that the damages awarded are inadequate . . . and that the verdict is perverse. The Court further concludes that perversity permeates the entire verdict.”
In setting aside a jury verdict and ordering a new trial, a trial court has to steer…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Johnson v. HeintzWisconsin Supreme Court · 1976
- Butzow v. Wausau Memorial HospitalWisconsin Supreme Court · 1971
- Selleck v. City of JanesvilleWisconsin Supreme Court · 1898
- Loomans v. Milwaukee Mutual InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1968
- Sell v. Milwaukee Automobile InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1962
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Lievrouw v. RothCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1990
- Becker v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1987
- Edwards v. SislerIndiana Court of Appeals · 1998
- Pieper v. Neuendorf Transportation Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1979
- Sentell v. HigbyCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1978
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.