A jury award in favor of a plaintiff on his claim of retaliatory discharge should be reduced because the jury’s finding of economic damages is inconsistent with the evidence, the Court of Appeals has ruled in an unpublished decision.
The plaintiff brought suit under the Whistleblowers’ Protection Act. At the conclusion of trial, the jury returned a verdict awarding the plaintiff $50,000 in economic damages and $50,000 in noneconomic damages. The defendant employer moved alternatively for a new trial, judgment notwithstanding the verdict or remittitur. The trial judge denied the motion and entered judgment in favor of the plaintiff for $100,000.
“Defendant contends that the trial court erred by denying its motion for remittitur because plaintiff did not offer proof of economic damages in excess of $25,000. We agree,” the Court of Appeals wrote in a per curiam opinion.
“In this case, plaintiff presented evidence supporting an award of $25,000 in economic damages and $75,000 in noneconomic damages. The jury awarded plaintiff $50,000 in economic damages and $50,000 in noneconomic damages. We agree with defendant that the jury’s finding of economic damages is inconsistent with the evidence. Accordingly, the trial court abused its discretion by denying defendant’s motion for remittitur,” the court stated.
“We vacate the judgment with respect to the award of economic damages. We affirm the judgment in all other respects. We remand to the trial court for entry of an amended...
LOS ANGELES--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Louis J. Cohen, P.C. announces a landmark whistleblower award agreement with the United States and the State of California, securing more than $4.5 million for our cli...