Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop
IIRC, I've done it (and it was).
|
Before or after the verdict?
It seems that arguing damages pre-verdict is particularly difficult. It's one thing to move for JMOL on the ground that the plaintiff failed to show, say, one necessary element of the claim. But for damages you would have to argue that no reasonable jury could find damages exceeding X amount, and then litigate whatever that amount is. Damages are on a continuum not binary (yes/no), so it seems like a particularly unproductive form of motion. It's another thing to argue post-verdict that the damages were excessive.
