Tennessee § 20-10-102 - Remittitur.

§ 20-10-102. Remittitur.

In all jury trials had in civil actions, after the verdict has been rendered and on motion for a new trial, when the trial judge is of the opinion that the verdict in favor of a party should be reduced and a remittitur is suggested by the trial judge on that account, with the proviso that in case the party in whose favor the verdict has been rendered refuses to make the remittitur, a new trial will be awarded, the party in whose favor such verdict has been rendered may make such remittitur under protest, and appeal from the action of the trial judge to the court of appeals. The court of appeals shall review the action of the trial court suggesting a remittitur using the standard of review provided for in T.R.A.P. 13(d) applicable to decisions of the trial court sitting without a jury. If, in the opinion of the court of appeals, the verdict of the jury should not have been reduced, but the judgment of the trial court is correct in other respects, the case shall be reversed to that extent, and judgment shall be rendered in the court of appeals for the full amount originally awarded by the jury in the trial court. Acts 1911, ch. 29, § 1; Shan., § 4852a1; Code 1932, § 8987; Acts 1949, ch. 253, § 1; C. Supp. 1950, § 8987; T.C.A. (orig. ed.), § 27-118; Acts 1987, ch. 232, § 2. Cross-References. Remittitur where sum found exceeds jurisdiction of general sessions court, § 16-15-726 . Textbooks. Tennessee Forms (Robinson, Ramsey and Harwell), No. 1-59.02-2. Tennessee Jurisprudence, 2 Tenn. Juris., Appeal and Error, §§ 30, 51, 122, 238, 246-259; 9 Tenn. Juris., Damages, § 28. Law Reviews. Moving to Comparative Negligence in an Era of Tort Reform: Decisions for Tennessee (Carol A. Mutter), 57 Tenn. L. Rev. 199 (1990). Paine on Procedure: Remittitur and Additur (Donald F. Paine), 42 Tenn B.J. 25 (2006). Torts — Hodges v. S.C. Toof & Co.: New Substantive and Procedural Changes in the Awarding of Punitive Damages in Tennessee, 23 Mem. St. U.L. Rev. 239 (1992). A Distinction Without a Difference: Revisiting the Constitutionality of Additur in Federal Courts, 48 U. Mem. L. Rev. 625 (2017).