§ 3.7.2.6.5.9 Jury Verdicts.

• Jurisdiction: Arizona

§ 3.7.2.6.5.9 Jury Verdicts. In reviewing a jury’s verdict, an appellate court views the evidence and the inferences in the light most favorable to sustaining the judgment and upholding the verdict. See Hutcherson v. City of Phoenix, 192 Ariz. 51, 53, ¶ 13, 961 P.2d 449, 451 (1998); D’Amico v. Structural I Co., 229 Ariz. 262, 263 n.1, ¶ 2, 274 P.3d 532, 533 n.1 (App. 2012); Johnson v. State Dep’t of Transp., 224 Ariz. 554, 555 n.1, ¶ 2, 233 P.3d 1133, 1134 n.1 (2010). Neither an appellate court nor a trial court may reweigh the evidence and set aside a jury verdict merely because the jury could have drawn different inferences or because other results were more reasonable. See In re Estate of Hanscome, 227 Ariz. 158, 162, ¶ 4, 254 P.3d 397, 401 (App. 2011).

The appellate court will affirm the verdict if there is substantial evidence to support it. See Flanders v. Maricopa Cty., 203 Ariz. 368, 371, ¶ 5, 54 P.3d 837, 840 (App. 2002); S. Dev. Co. v. Pima Capital Mgmt. Co., 201 Ariz. 10, 23, ¶ 42, 31 P.3d 123, 136 (App. 2001). If any substantial evidence could lead reasonable persons to find the ultimate facts sufficient to support the verdict, the appellate court will affirm the judgment. See Gonzales v. City of Phoenix, 203 Ariz. 152, 153, ¶ 2, 52 P.3d 184, 185 (2002); Warrington v. Tempe Elementary Sch. Dist. No. 3, 197 Ariz. 68, 71, ¶ 13, 3 P.3d 988, 991 (App. 1999) (evidence viewed in light most favorable to sustaining verdict). However, reversal is required when a jury’s verdict is supported by nothing beyond speculation, suspicion and bottomless inference. See Hudgins v. Sw. Airlines, Co., 221...