At the end of a personal injury lawsuit, the jury decides if the defendant is liable for the victim’s injuries. If they find in favor of the victim, they also determine the amount of money, or damages, the victim should receive.
However, sometimes the jury’s award may not reflect the true extent of the victim’s damages, or it could be excessively high. This is where legal processes like additur and remittitur come into play. These tools help adjust the amount awarded, either increasing or decreasing it to ensure fairness.
In personal injury cases, jury verdicts are not always perfect. Sometimes, the amount of damages they award a plaintiff (victim) may be too low to cover the full extent of their losses.
Other times, the award may be considered too high. When this happens, either the plaintiff or the defendant may challenge the verdict, leading to a legal process called additur or remittitur.
These processes provide a way to rectify unfair jury awards without needing a whole new trial. Understanding how they work can help plaintiffs and defendants navigate their personal injury cases more effectively.
Additur is a legal tool that allows a court to increase the amount of money awarded by a jury. This is usually used when the damages awarded are far below what the plaintiff deserves, considering their injuries, medical expenses, and other losses.
In simple terms, additur means the judge believes the jury awarded an unfairly low amount of compensation to the plaintiff. The court can step in and raise the amount. This process helps ensure the victim gets the money they need to cover their damages.
Additur typically happens when the jury’s award is grossly inadequate. This could be due to an oversight, prejudice, or mistake by the jury. For example, if the jury awards a sum that doesn’t even cover the victim’s medical bills or lost wages, the plaintiff’s attorney may request additur to adjust the award.
The benefit of additur is straightforward: the plaintiff gets more money without the need for a new trial. If the judge agrees the award was too low, they may offer additur to the defendant as an option to avoid a costly retrial.
The defendant can either agree to the increased award or risk a new trial, which could end up costing them even more.
Remittitur is the opposite of additur. It is a process where the court reduces the amount of money awarded by the jury if the amount seems unreasonably high for the circumstances.
Remittitur happens when a judge believes the jury’s verdict is excessively large and not in line with the actual damages the plaintiff suffered. The judge steps in to reduce the award, ensuring the defendant isn’t unfairly punished by an overly generous jury.
A judge may order remittitur if they believe the jury’s award is excessive, especially if there are signs of prejudice, passion, or mistake influencing the jury’s decision.
However, it’s important to note that an award that simply seems “large” isn’t enough reason for remittitur. The amount must be so excessive that it constitutes a miscarriage of justice.
If the judge orders remittitur, the plaintiff must comply with the reduced amount. They don’t have the option to reject it. If the plaintiff disagrees with the reduction, they may request a new trial, but there’s no guarantee they will receive a more favorable outcome.
While both additur and remittitur adjust jury awards, they work in opposite directions. Additur increases the damages when the award is too low, benefiting the plaintiff.
Remittitur, on the other hand, reduces an excessive award, benefiting the defendant. Both processes aim to ensure fairness and prevent unjust outcomes, whether the jury’s decision was too lenient or overly generous.
Once a judge orders additur or remittitur, the parties involved must decide their next steps.
If additur is proposed, the defendant has two options: accept the increased award or opt for a new trial. Accepting the additur means the case ends there, and the plaintiff gets the additional compensation.
If the defendant chooses a new trial, they risk a potentially higher award or an unfavorable outcome.
In remittitur cases, the plaintiff doesn’t have the option to reject the reduced amount. They must comply with the judge’s order.
However, if the plaintiff believes the reduction is unfair, they can appeal the decision or request a new trial, although this carries its own risks.
Both parties have the right to appeal a judge’s decision on additur or remittitur. However, filing an appeal can lead to further legal proceedings, potentially drawing out the case and increasing legal costs.
One of the key benefits of additur and remittitur is that they save time and resources. Instead of starting a new trial, which can be costly and time-consuming for both the court and the parties involved, these processes allow the court to correct an unjust award more efficiently.
This helps ensure a fair outcome without dragging the case on unnecessarily.
Consider a case where a jury awarded a plaintiff $50,000 for serious injuries that required lifelong care, far below what they needed. In such a case, the plaintiff’s attorney may request additur, and the court could increase the award to $200,000 to ensure the victim is fairly compensated.
On the other hand, if a jury awarded $1 million to a plaintiff for relatively minor injuries, the defendant may request remittitur. The judge could then reduce the amount to a more reasonable figure, like $200,000, to prevent an unfair financial burden on the defendant.
Additur increases a jury’s award if it’s too low, while remittitur reduces it if it’s excessively high.
Additur is used when the awarded amount doesn’t fairly compensate the victim.
No, plaintiffs don’t reject additur as it benefits them.
Remittitur is ordered when a judge finds the award to be excessively high.
They avoid the need for a costly and time-consuming new trial.
Navigating the complexities of additur and remittitur requires expert legal guidance. If your personal injury case involves these processes, working with a knowledgeable attorney can make all the difference. For help ensuring a fair outcome in your case, contact Manchin Injury Law Group today for a free consultation We’re here to protect your rights and help you get the compensation you deserve.
Member at Manchin Injury Law Group
Practice Area: Personal Injury
Attorney Timothy Manchin established the Manchin Injury Law Group in 2011 after his law partner of more than 25 years became a West Virginia circuit court judge. His focus is on helping individual clients and entire families victimized by negligent acts.
We offer a free initial consultation at our office in the Manchin Professional Building — our home since 1983 — conveniently located in Fairmont.
If you are unable to visit our firm, we can come to your home or hospital room.
Fill out the form below to get in touch!
