Legal Opinion
Sandoval v. Chrysler Corp.
New Mexico Court of Appeals
Decided May 20, 1998No. 18198PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BOSSON, Judge.
{1} We are called upon to examine the duty of the trial judge who finds that a jury’s award of compensatory damages shocks the conscience of the court, but who nevertheless denies a motion for remittitur or, in the alternative, a new trial. We hold in this case that the court abused its discretion in failing to act upon its findings regarding an excessive verdict, and we reverse and remand for the court to do so. We also address the difficulty facing trial judges in evaluating the amount of damages awarded by a jury for pain and suffering, and we reconfirm our conviction…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Best v. Taylor MacHine WorksIllinois Supreme Court · 1997
- Crookston v. Fire Insurance ExchangeUtah Supreme Court · 1991
- Sweitzer v. SanchezNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1969
- Richardson v. RutherfordNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1990
- Grammer v. Kohlhaas Tank & Equipment Co.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 1979
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Allsup's Convenience Stores, Inc. v. North River InsuranceNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1998
- Elm Ridge Exploration Company v. EngleCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2013
- Sandoval v. Baker Hughes Oilfield Operations, Inc.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 2009
- Velasquez v. Regents of Northern N.M. Coll.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 2020
- Ennis v. Kmart Corp.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 2001
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.