Gallagher v. Latham CA2/7
This appeal and cross-appeal arise out of a car accident in which Rebecca Latham hit Samuel Gallagher as he was walking in a crosswalk. A jury found Latham negligent and awarded Gallagher future economic damages, including medical expenses, past noneconomic damages, but no future noneconomic damages. Gallagher filed a motion for a new trial, arguing the jury’s award was inadequate and inconsistent. The trial court failed to rule on the motion within the 60-day statutory deadline, but subsequently issued an order nunc pro tunc purporting to grant the motion for a new trial.
In her appeal, Latham argues the trial court lacked jurisdiction to grant a new trial after the expiration of the 60-day period. In his cross-appeal, Gallagher argues that, if the nunc pro tunc order was not effective and his motion for a new trial was denied as a matter of law, the jury’s verdict was inadequate and inconsistent.
Comments on Gallagher v. Latham CA2/7