 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Prudential Ballard Realty Company7/28/2000
On Application for Rehearing
The opinion released April 14, 2000, is withdrawn and the following is substituted therefor.
The defendants Prudential Ballard Realty Company, Inc., and its agent Hugh Weimorts appeal from a judgment entered on a jury verdict in favor of the plaintiffs James Weatherly and his wife Carol Weatherly. The Weatherlys had sued the defendants for damages based on fraudulent misrepresentations they allege the defendants made while the defendants had the Weatherlys' home listed for sale. We affirm.
"In reviewing a jury verdict, an appellate court must consider the evidence in the light most favorable to the prevailing party ...." Delchamps, Inc. v. Bryant, 738 So. 2d 824, 831 (Ala. 1999). Considered in that manner, the evidence suggests the following facts: In May 1995, the Weatherlys listed their Montgomery home for sale with Weimorts. Weimorts then assisted the Weatherlys in finding a home to purchase in Lowndes County. The Weatherlys signed a contract to purchase a home in Lowndes County, but the contract was contingent upon the Weatherlys' finding a purchaser for their Montgomery home before August 30, 1995. On August 28, 1995, Eddie Stallworth and his wife signed a contract to purchase the Weatherlys' Montgomery home. The Stallworths' contract was contingent on the Stallworths' being able to obtain financing for the purchase. Weimorts assured the Weatherlys that the Stallworths had the financing to purchase the Weatherlys' home, when in fact they did not. The Weatherlys told Weimorts that they could not afford to own both homes at the same time. Based upon Weimorts' misrepresentations, the Weatherlys closed on the purchase of the Lowndes County home and, anticipating closing on the sale of the Montgomery home, allowed the Stallworths to move into the Montgomery home. The Stallworths, however, were never able to get financing for the purchase of the Montgomery home; they began making rental payments to the Weatherlys. The Weatherlys did not sell the Montgomery home until October 1996. The Weatherlys allege that they suffered financial injury and mental anguish from October 1995 to October 1996, the 12-month period during which they owned both homes. The Weatherlys filed an action in Lowndes County to recover damages based upon the defendants' misrepresentations. The jury awarded the Weatherlys $250,000 in compensatory damages and $2.5 million in punitive damages. The trial court denied the defendants' motion for a new trial and their motion for a judgment as a matter of law, but conditioned its denial of a new trial on the Weatherlys' accepting a remittitur of punitive damages of $1,250,000. The Weatherlys accepted the remittitur.
The following issues are presented for review:
1. Whether the defendants were entitled to a judgment as a matter of law on the ground that the evidence was insufficient to submit the plaintiffs' claims to the jury;
2. Whether the defendants were entitled to a new trial on the ground that the plaintiffs engaged in racial discrimination in the use of their peremptory challenges;
3. Whether the defendants were entitled to a new trial on the ground that the trial court refused to give three of their requested jury instructions (nos. 53, 63, and 65);
4. Whether the defendants were entitled to a new trial on the ground that the compensatory-damages award was excessive; and,
5. Whether the defendants were entitled to a new trial on the ground that the punitive-damages award (as remitted) was excessive.
With respect to the first issue, we note that we have carefully considered the defendants' argument that the evidence was insufficient f
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Alabama Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|