numerical standard (Tennessee) · Go Syfert
← Tennessee issues

numerical standard in Tennessee

7 Tennessee opinions name it 2 courts 1999–2020 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Tennessee courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (3)

CaseFollowedCited
Foster v. Amcon International, Inc.green
tenn · 1981 · cited in 7 Tennessee opinions naming this issue, 1999–2020
2 sentences

2020See [Foster, 621 S.W.2d at 148 n.9] (“[W]e do not intend to establish a numerical standard for reviewing additurs and remittiturs.”); Webb v. Canada, No. E2006-01701-COA-R3- - 28 - Next, we turn to the remaining prongs: the reasons given by the trial judge and the proof of damages to determine the preponderance of the evidence. “[W]here there is an itemized verdict form, remittitur should be suggested as to particular itemized verdict amounts, because the jury has assigned a separate monetary loss for each type of damages requested and the proof as to each type of damages must be considered se

2018See Foster, 621 S.W.2d at 148 n.9 (“[W]e do not intend to establish a numerical standard for reviewing additurs and remittiturs.”); Myers v. Myers, No. E2004-02135-COA-R3-CV, 2005 WL 1521952 , at *4 (Tenn. Ct. App. June 27, 2005) (“[T]he Supreme Court has shied away from setting numerical standards for reviewing additurs and remittiturs.”); Lebovitz v. Bearden, 1993 WL 471479 , at *4 (Tenn. Ct. App. Nov. 16, 1993) (stating that the Court did not propose to establish a numerical standard for reviewing additur cases on appeal).

47
Guess v. Maurygreen
tennctapp · 1986 · cited in 3 Tennessee opinions naming this issue, 1999–2013
2 sentences

2013See Foster, 621 S.W.2d at 148 n.9; Guess v. Maury, 726 S.W.2d 906, 913 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1986), overruled on an unrelated ground by Elliott v. Cobb, 320 S.W.3d 246 (Tenn. 2010).

2004As this Court has noted before, we are reluctant to “establish a numerical standard for reviewing additur and remittitur cases.” McKinney, 1999 Tenn. App. LEXIS 745 , at *14 (citing Foster v. Amcon Int’l, Inc, 621 S.W.2d 142 , 148 n.9 (Tenn. 1981); Guess v. Maury, 726 S.W.2d 906, 913 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1986); Lebovitz v. Bearden, No. 02A01-9211-CV-00308, 1993 Tenn. App. LEXIS 705 , at *11-12 (Tenn. Ct. App. Nov. 16, 1993)).

33
Karen Johnson v. Beverly Nunis and Farmer's Insurance Exchangegreen
tennctapp · 2012 · cited in 1 Tennessee opinions naming this issue, 2020–2020
1 sentence

2020See [Foster, 621 S.W.2d at 148 n.9] (“[W]e do not intend to establish a numerical standard for reviewing additurs and remittiturs.”); Webb v. Canada, No. E2006-01701-COA-R3- - 28 - Next, we turn to the remaining prongs: the reasons given by the trial judge and the proof of damages to determine the preponderance of the evidence. “[W]here there is an itemized verdict form, remittitur should be suggested as to particular itemized verdict amounts, because the jury has assigned a separate monetary loss for each type of damages requested and the proof as to each type of damages must be considered se

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Tennessee. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (1)

CaseCitedYears
Amanda Elliott v. R. Michael Cobb green
tenn · 2010
1 sentence

2013See Foster, 621 S.W.2d at 148 n.9; Guess v. Maury, 726 S.W.2d 906, 913 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1986), overruled on an unrelated ground by Elliott v. Cobb, 320 S.W.3d 246 (Tenn. 2010).

12013–2013

Statutes the citing opinions construe

TN § Tenn. Code Ann. § 20-10-101 (5) TN § Tenn. Code Ann. § 20-10-102 (4)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

TX 12 (2000–2015) NC 11 (1984–2023) CA 8 (1989–2018) TN 7 (1999–2020) NJ 6 (1994–2017) OH 5 (1990–2021) FL 4 (1988–2018) IL 3 (1981–1990) VT 3 (1986–1991) GA 3 (1992–1997) WI 2 (1910–1972)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check