Guox Ex Rel. Abrams v. Satterly
Case Details
- Judge(s)
- Steelman, Wynn, Calabria
- Status
- Published
- Procedural Posture
- appellate review of trial court's grant of motion for new trial
Related Laws
No specific laws identified for this ruling.
Outcome
Trial court granted plaintiffs' motion for new trial on damages to minor plaintiffs in automobile accident case. Appellate court affirmed the trial court's discretionary decision to grant new trial, finding no abuse of discretion.
Excerpt
1. Trials — motion for new trial — abuse of discretion standard The trial court did not err in an action arising out of an automobile accident by setting aside the verdict and by granting plaintiffs' motion for a new trial on the issue of damages to the minor plaintiffs, because: (1) an appellate court may reverse the trial court's decision to grant a new trial, but only in those exceptional cases where abuse of discretion is clearly shown; and (2) a review of the record revealed that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting plaintiffs' motion. 2. Evidence — defendant's testimony — damages The trial court did not err in an action arising out of an automobile accident by considering defendant's testimony as a basis for awarding a new trial on the issue of damages to the minor plaintiffs where plaintiff never objected to such testimony at trial, because: (1) a trial court is not prevented from considering specific testimony when ruling on a motion for a newPage 579 trial under N.C.G.S. § 1A-1, Rule 59(a)(6) even if a party did not object to it; and (2) Rule 59(a)(6) requires the trial court to find the award of damages to have been influenced by passion or prejudice, and such a determination requires a consideration of the entire record. 3. Evidence — findings of fact — conclusions of law The trial court did not err in an action arising out of an automobile accident by its finding of fact number 12 because it was supported by competent evidence, and the conclusions of law were supported by the findings of fact. 4. Trials — motion for new trial — abuse of discretion standard — de novo review While a trial court's conclusions of law are reviewable de novo, a ruling in the discretion of the trial c
What This Ruling Means
This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.
Similar Rulings
second opinion evaluation, temporary partial disability, wage records
unemployment benefits; discharge; voluntary departure; misconduct; benefit eligibility.
Facing something similar at work?
Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.
This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.