Wackenhut Corp. v. Canty

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• upholding district court's reversal of trial court's grant of new trial where trial order did not explain why verdict was excessive
• limiting review to trial judge's stated reasons for new trial, rejecting each of them, and concluding that \the trial judge in this case acted as a seventh juror with veto power\
• “[Requiring a remittitur without an explanation founded in the record and ... without stating reasons capable of demonstration in the record or beyond the record (such as influences which aroused the passion and prejudice of the jury
• record must affirmatively show the impropriety of a verdict for the verdict to be declared excessive
• the province of the jury should not be invaded by a judge because he raises a judicial eyebrow at its verdict
• trial judge improperly acted as seventh juror in ordering remittitur or new trial; province of jury ought not to be invaded by a judge merely because he raises a judicial eyebrow at its verdict

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).