# Any remedy if a jury goes crazy in a civil trial? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [December 3, 2013, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-remedy-if-a-jury-goes-crazy-in-a-civil-trial/675408 "2013-12-03T21:54:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 12\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![sweeteviljesus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/898d66/32.png) [@sweeteviljesus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sweeteviljesus)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2013, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-remedy-if-a-jury-goes-crazy-in-a-civil-trial/675408/1 "2013-12-03T21:54:40Z")
In a civil trial, if the jury finds for one party which flies in the face of the facts in the opinion of the other party, is there any remedy? Do appeals courts in civil trials look at the facts or are they just looking at procedural matters like they do in criminal trials? Thanks, Rob ---
**Author:** ![KneadToKnow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kneadtoknow/32/3999_2.png) [@KneadToKnow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KneadToKnow)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2013, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-remedy-if-a-jury-goes-crazy-in-a-civil-trial/675408/2 "2013-12-03T22:00:03Z")
There’s always the option for the judge to issue a [judgment notwithstanding verdict](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judgment_notwithstanding_verdict). ---
**Author:** ![Telemark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/telemark/32/372_2.png) [@Telemark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Telemark)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2013, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-remedy-if-a-jury-goes-crazy-in-a-civil-trial/675408/3 "2013-12-03T22:00:55Z")
Judgments are often reduced on appeal - a quick Google search will bring up a variety of them in all sorts of cases. [http://civilprocedure.dbllaw.com/2012/01/appealing-an-excessive-punitive-damages-award/](http://civilprocedure.dbllaw.com/2012/01/appealing-an-excessive-punitive-damages-award/) ---
**Author:** ![sweeteviljesus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/898d66/32.png) [@sweeteviljesus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sweeteviljesus)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2013, 10:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-remedy-if-a-jury-goes-crazy-in-a-civil-trial/675408/4 "2013-12-03T22:29:58Z")
> [@KneadToKnow](#): > > There’s always the option for the judge to issue a [judgment notwithstanding verdict](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judgment_notwithstanding_verdict). Can such a ruling be granted on appeal? Thanks, Rob ---
**Author:** ![Procrustus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/procrustus/32/2994_2.png) [@Procrustus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Procrustus)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2013, 10:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-remedy-if-a-jury-goes-crazy-in-a-civil-trial/675408/5 "2013-12-03T22:54:32Z")
> [@sweeteviljesus](#): > > Can such a ruling be granted on appeal? > > Thanks, > Rob Not really. It can be overturned on appeal. ---
**Author:** ![samclem](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a9a28c/32.png) [@samclem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/samclem)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2013, 11:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-remedy-if-a-jury-goes-crazy-in-a-civil-trial/675408/6 "2013-12-03T23:37:21Z")
The classic case in my mind was the **Liebeck v. McDonald’s Restaurants** trial, dubbed the [Mcdonald’s coffee case](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald's_Restaurants) where the jury found against McDonald’s for $2.7 million dollars but the judge reduced it to $640,000. The irony was that the lady orginally offered to settle for $20,000. ---
**Author:** ![Gray\_Ghost](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/c0e974/32.png) [@Gray\_Ghost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gray_Ghost)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2013, 12:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-remedy-if-a-jury-goes-crazy-in-a-civil-trial/675408/7 "2013-12-04T00:03:02Z")
Also see [Additur](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Additur) and [Remittitur](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remittitur). Edit: I can’t say for sure, but I think the McDonalds case that **samclem** mentioned above is an example of what remittitur looks like: the judge unilaterally lowering the amount of the jury award, and the plaintiff either accepting it, or going through a new trial. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2013, 12:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-remedy-if-a-jury-goes-crazy-in-a-civil-trial/675408/8 "2013-12-04T00:37:20Z")
West Virginia law on the subject: In West Virginia, an appellate court will not set aside a jury verdict upon the claims that it is excessive, “unless the verdict is monstrous and enormous, at first blush beyond all measure, unreasonable and outrageous, and such as manifestly shows jury passion, partiality, prejudice, or corruption.” Syl. Pt., Addair v. Majestic Petroleum Co., Inc., 160 W.Va. 105, 232 S.E.2d 821 (1977). ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2013, 12:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-remedy-if-a-jury-goes-crazy-in-a-civil-trial/675408/9 "2013-12-04T00:43:55Z")
“\*t is the province of the jury to resolve conflicting inferences from circumstantial evidence. Permissible inferences must still be within the range of reasonable probability, however, and it is the duty of the court to withdraw the case from the jury when the necessary inference is so tenuous that it rests merely upon speculation and conjecture.” Williams v. Precision Coil, Inc., 459 S.E. 2d 329 (W.Va. 1995) (internal citations omitted) That is the answer to your question that I misunderstood…at least in West Virginia. ---
**Author:** ![md2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/73ab20/32.png) [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2013, 3:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-remedy-if-a-jury-goes-crazy-in-a-civil-trial/675408/10 "2013-12-04T03:34:02Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > “\*t is the province of the jury to resolve conflicting inferences from circumstantial evidence. Permissible inferences must still be within the range of reasonable probability, however, and it is the duty of the court to withdraw the case from the jury when the necessary inference is so tenuous that it rests merely upon speculation and conjecture.” Williams v. Precision Coil, Inc., 459 S.E. 2d 329 (W.Va. 1995) (internal citations omitted) > > That is the answer to your question that I misunderstood…at least in West Virginia. So does that mean - the judge cancels the trial or some aspect of it (analogous to a criminal trial ruling of “insufficient evidence”?) I assume that means the corollary is that the appeal court can find “the judge should have withdrawn the case” - can they then cancel the case / judgement, or require a new trial, or the roundabout route where they order a new trial with instructions to the judge to withdraw the case? ---
**Author:** ![md2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/73ab20/32.png) [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2013, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-remedy-if-a-jury-goes-crazy-in-a-civil-trial/675408/11 "2013-12-04T16:44:43Z")
> **[Ohio Court Upholds Jury Verdict against Adverse Possession Claim](https://ohioaglaw.wordpress.com/2013/08/30/ohio-court-upholds-jury-verdict-against-adverse-possession-claim/)** > > Peggy Kirk Hall, Asst. Professor, OSUE Agricultural & Resource Law Program     . A recent decision by the Ohio Court of Appeals addressed two important legal standards: the proof necessary to c… I found this case - an argument about squatter’s rights, where the jury sided with the title holder. > [@](#): > > After the jury verdict, the Kiesels asked the court for a “judgment notwithstanding the verdict.” This motion argues that the court should set aside a jury verdict because reasonable minds could have come to only one conclusion based on the evidence submitted, and that conclusion was opposite the jury’s decision. The trial court agreed and granted the Kiesels’ motion to replace the jury’s verdict, commenting that the jury had “lost its way.” > > … > > The Sixth District Court of Appeals reinstated the jury’s verdict. The trial court’s conclusion that the jury had “lost its way” was “patently the wrong standard to use,” the court of appeals stated. Instead, the trial court should have determined whether reasonable minds could have disagreed on the decision. Examining all of the witness testimony, the appeals court concluded that the testimony was not conclusive either way; reasonable minds could have examined the evidence and reached different conclusions about whether the Kiesels had proven adverse possession. For this reason, the trial court erred by setting aside the jury’s verdict. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2013, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-remedy-if-a-jury-goes-crazy-in-a-civil-trial/675408/12 "2013-12-04T18:42:36Z")
That’s it. That’s generally the standard across the country: the “no reasonable juror” standard. It cannot simply be that the judge disagrees with the jury’s decision or feels that they gave too much weight to a piece of evidence. The court (trial or appellate) must find that the evidence was so one-sided that no reasonable juror could have possibly looked at the evidence and found the way they did. This can also be done before it even reaches the jury on a Motion for Summary Judgment.