#Jmol civil procedure how to
#Jmol civil procedure trial

This rule, the Fifth Circuit pointed out, is designed to enable the district court to fix its own errors and, if successful, can make an appeal unnecessary.

Within 28 days after entry of the final judgment, a motion to alter or amend under Fed.

The plaintiff could have used this rule to request entry of a final judgment reflecting both the jury verdict and the partial summary-judgment opinion, but failed to do so.

A request that the judgment be set out in a separate document under Fed.

The Fifth Circuit went on to describe motions that were available to address the inconsistency between Judge Brady’s partial summary judgment for $1,017,528.20 and the final judgment awarding only $269,706.50: 59(a)īecause the plaintiff failed to file any of these motions in the district court, it forfeited its ability to seek appellate review of the jury verdict.

#Jmol civil procedure trial

A motion for new trial (in this instance, a new trial on damages) under Fed.If a pre-verdict motion for JMOL has been filed, a renewed post-verdict motion for judgment as a matter of law under Fed.A pre-verdict motion for judgment as a matter of law under Fed.The court then went on to list the motions available in the trial court to head off or correct an erroneous verdict: The court began by citing the Seventh Amendment, which prevents an appellate court from simply increasing the damages awarded in a verdict. The Fifth Circuit rejected the plaintiff’s argument and affirmed the final judgment. In its cross-appeal, the plaintiff argued that the $269,706.50 award was too low and should be amended to reflect total damages of over $1.3 million or, alternatively, at least the $1,017,528.20 found to be owed by Judge Brady’s partial summary judgment. The final judgment didn’t mention Judge Brady’s prior summary judgment or his damages calculation for the 2,027 undisputed specimens.īoth sides appealed. Fifteen months later, another judge entered final judgment for plaintiff on the jury verdict. Shortly after the verdict, Judge Brady died. The verdict form did not specify whether this figure was for all 2,679 specimens or just the 652 specimens on which Judge Brady had denied summary judgment. For the contract on which Judge Brady had granted partial summary judgment, the jury awarded damages of $269,706.50. The jury returned a verdict in plaintiff’s favor on both contracts. The judge apparently left for the jury the question of damages for the remaining 652 specimens. As to the 2,027 undisputed samples, Judge Brady concluded that the defendant owed the plaintiff $1,017,528.20, less $73,134.34 already paid (the difference is $944,393.86).

La.) rendered partial summary judgment in the plaintiff’s favor on one of the contracts, finding that the defendant owed damages for 2,027 of the 2,679 contested specimens. The case was a suit for breach of two contracts involving payment for testing lab specimens. The court’s opinion is a handy summary of the motions available in federal court to address errors in the district court, before the cement dries on the final judgment.

And chose exactly none of them.” Acadian Diagnostic Labs., LLC v. As explained by the court, “the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provide several ways for a federal litigant to seek a different damages figure than that which the jury awards.

#Jmol civil procedure how to

Fifth Circuit issued a valuable opinion on how to fix erroneous awards of damages in the federal system.