Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Appellate Law Blogs -> Illinois Appellate Lawyer Blog
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Appellate Law
: Illinois Appellate Lawyer BlogFirst District Illinois Appellate Court Defines Standards Of Review For Motion For New Trial And For Judgment Notwithstanding Verdict
By Steven R. Merican
Heather Addis sued Exelon for retaliatory discharge. Unhappy with the jury?s defense verdict, Addis moved for judgment notwithstanding the verdict and for a new trial. After those motions were denied, Addis appealed.
The First District Illinois Appellate Court ruled that the two issues had different standards of review on appeal. A motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict is reviewed de novo. A motion for a new trial, the court stated, is reviewed for a clear abuse of discretion. In this case, Addis?s appellate brief argued only for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. Even though she appealed from the order denying her motion for a new trial, her failure to argue that position in her appellate brief resulted in waiver of her new trial position.
This opinion muddies the ?abuse of discretion? standard by defining it with ?manifest weight? language. The court stated: ?In determining whether the trial court abused its discretion, we consider whether the jury?s verdict was against the manifest weight of the evidence.? So which is it ? abuse of discretion or manifest weight?
In the end, the confusion may not have mattered in this case. The court ruled that there was plenty of evidence for the jury to conclude in Exelon?s favor. ?? [W]hen viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to defendant, we cannot find that the evidence so overwhelmingly favors plaintiff that no contrary verdict could stand. Therefore, we conclude that the circuit court properly denied plaintiff's motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict.? That sounds like a de novo review, which is what the court called for on the motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
Read the whole opinion, Addis v. Exelon Generation Co., No. 1-06-2732 (12/26/07), by clicking here.
Full post as published by Illinois Appellate Lawyer Blog on March 11, 2008 (boomark / email).
Selection of State Supreme Court Judges
How State Court Judges are Selected
Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Career Choices
Descriptions of law enforcement occupations
California Supreme Court Proposition 8 Decision
Court Rejects Challenges to Proposition 8, but Finds Marriages Valid
Is Barack Obama a Natural Born Citizen?
Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz (Supreme Court): Does Obama meet the constitutional requirements to be President
Heart of Atlanta v United States
Supreme Court Decision: Civil Rights Act Protected by Interstate Commerce Clause
Unwed Fathers' Rights in Adoption
Landmark Cases in Adoption Law Shape Law with respect to Unwed Fathers
Rutland School District
Double pay offered as part of class action wage dispute settlement, pending court approval.
$1.5 Million Asbestos Mesothelioma Verdict Against Fisher Controls International
$1.5 Million Asbestos Mesothelioma Verdict
Illinois Ground Beef Recalled
due to Possible E. coli Contamination
Illinois Residents
Exposed to Potentially Carcinogenic Drinking Water
University of Illinois Medical Center
Potential $14 Million in Malpractice Settlements
$1.5 Million Verdict for Injured Worker
$1.5 Million Verdict for Injured Worker

Supreme Court Clarifies Texas Post-Trial Motion Practice
Ground Stated in Motion for New Trial Colors Standard of Review
Failure to Renew Evidentiary Objections Raised in Motion in Limine Waives Appellate Review
No Relief from Judgment for Post Judgment Reexamination Statements
Brief-Writing Tips for the Illinois Appellate Court
ILLINOIS STANDARD FOR DIRECTED VERDICT IN BENCH TRIAL








