22.18 - C. Inconsistent Or Compromise Verdict

JurisdictionNew York

c. Inconsistent or Compromise Verdict

When a verdict is inherently inconsistent or irreconcilable, it must be set aside.3418 A verdict is inconsistent when (1) the jury’s finding on one cause of action necessarily negates an element of another cause of action,3419 (2) the jury reaches inconsistent results to parties identically situated,3420 or (3) the jury’s various findings cannot be logically resolved.3421

As discussed earlier,3422 the proper procedure when the jury returns an inconsistent verdict is to resubmit the case for further consideration. When, however, the jury has been discharged or was unable to resolve the inconsistency and the issue is properly preserved by the party asserting the inconsistency, a new trial should be ordered.3423

Reviewing this issue, the courts will make every reasonable effort to resolve an inconsistency and uphold the verdict. Thus, if an apparent inconsistency was the result of an erroneous charge to which no exception was taken, the verdict will not be set aside.3424

If a verdict is not warranted under the evidence and represents a compromise among the jurors rather than a deliberate exercise of their judgment, it will be set aside.3425 A verdict will not be viewed as a compromise if there is any possible theory to support it.3426

When the jury returns a grossly inadequate damage award, a new trial should be ordered only on the issue of damages unless there is some indication the jury compromised on liability as well, in which case a new trial should be held as to all issues.3427 When liability is “sharply and substantially contested” and the damage award is “inexplicably low,” a new trial should be ordered as...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT