Legal Opinion

Lee v. Ball

Nevada Supreme Court

Decided July 28, 2005No. 41686PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

By the Court,

Maupin, J.:

In this appeal, we clarify that a district court’s grant of additur is only appropriate when presented to the defendant as an alternative to a new trial on damages.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

The litigation below arose from a car accident in which the passenger in a vehicle, respondent Christopher Ball, sustained injuries after the driver, appellant Barry Lee, negligently turned into oncoming traffic. Ball sued Lee, alleging general and special damages. Unhappy with the results of court-annexed arbitration, Lee requested a trial de novo. Before trial, Lee served…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Evans v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc.Nevada Supreme Court · 2000
  2. Drummond v. Mid-West Growers Cooperative Corp.Nevada Supreme Court · 1975
  3. Bradley v. RomeoNevada Supreme Court · 1986
  4. Gibellini v. KlindtNevada Supreme Court · 1994
  5. ITT Hartford Ins. Co. of the SE v. OwensSupreme Court of Florida · 2002

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Albios v. Horizon Communities, Inc.Nevada Supreme Court · 2006
  2. Kerala Properties, Inc. v. FamilianNevada Supreme Court · 2006
  3. Alutiiq International Solutions, LLC v. OIC Marianas InsuranceDistrict Court, D. Nevada · 2016
  4. Schiff v. WinchellNevada Supreme Court · 2010
  5. Hill Vs. Parker C/W 81138Nevada Supreme Court · 2021

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API