Seminal Remittitur Ruling Seems To Work for Defense Advantage

, New Jersey Law Journal


The shakeout from a state Supreme Court precedent that set guidelines for handling remittitur motions is not good news for plaintiffs, as a pair of recent rulings illustrates.

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to LexisAdvance®.

Continue to LexisAdvance®

Not a LexisAdvance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via LexisAdvance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at

What's being said

  • Norberto A. Garcia

    If the court requires an analysis of similar verdicts when a remittitur application is made, then the court should establish an accessible data base that provides information on all statewide verdicts. Otherwise, plaintiffs will be at a disadvantage in accessing the information needed to oppose such a motion. But then how are settlements in similar cases accessed? What about confidential settlements?

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article #1202598534559

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.