NESC, Inc. d/b/a New England Specialty Concrete v. Bacon Construction Co., Inc.

Excerpt

The defendant, Bacon Construction Co., Inc., appealed from the entry of judgment in favor of the plaintiff, NESC, Inc., following a jury trial. Specifically, the defendant argued that the trial justice erred in denying its "Motion for New Trial Pursuant to Rule 59, or in the Alternative, Remittitur." The plaintiff cross-appealed from both an order denying its motion for leave to amend its Complaint and an order denying its motion to reconsider the denial of its motion to amend. On appeal, the defendant contended that the trial justice overlooked or misconceived material evidence in finding: (1) that the parties agreed to use the figure of 88,800 square feet as the basis for calculating the contract price (2) that the parties agreed to convert a unit-price contract into a lump-sum contract and (3) that Mr. Reuter, an employee of the defendant, had authority to bind the defendant to an agreement regarding square footage. Alternatively, Bacon argued that the trial justice erred in denying its request for a remittitur. The Supreme Court held that the trial justice did not overlook or misconceive material evidence or clearly err in denying the defendant's motion for a new trial. The Court concluded that the trial justice properly performed her role as a "super juror" in weighing the evidence and assessing the credibility of witnesses before determining that reasonable minds could differ as to whether the parties agreed to use 88,800 square feet as the basis for the contract price. The Court also held that the trial justice appropriately denied the defendant's request for a remittitur because the jury's award of damages was clearly supported by the evidence. Accordingly, the Court affirmed the judgment of the Superior Court.