In any jury case where the court orders a decrease in the amount of the judgment or an increase in the amount of the judgment, the party aggrieved by the order of remittitur or additur may appeal as in any civil action. The appeal shall be on the issue of damages only, and judgment shall enter upon the verdict of liability and damages after the issue of damages is decided.
(February, 1965, P.A. 605; 1972, P.A. 108, S. 10; P.A. 82-160, S. 114.)
History: 1972 act applied provisions to cases where court orders an additur; P.A. 82-160 replaced “remittitur or additur” with “decrease in the amount of the judgment or an increase in the amount of the judgment”.
Cited. 208 C. 82. Legislature provided explicit right to appeal under section not as replacement for Sec. 52-228b right to reject the additur, but as alternative recourse for plaintiff; this section and Sec. 52-228b are not inconsistent with one another. 246 C. 170.
Cited. 2 CA 174; 35 CA 850. A party, having accepted an additur, lacks standing to appeal from the order granting that additur. 72 CA 327. When court rendered judgment in favor of plaintiff on same day she accepted additur, it essentially denied defendant opportunity to respond to additur by the deadline it previously had ordered; that denial contravenes provisions contained in Sec. 52-228b which allow parties a reasonable time in which to accept the additur; because court rendered judgment before allowing defendant either to accept or reject the additur, court acted improperly. 93 CA 309.
Notes of Decisions
Stern v. Allied Van Lines, Inc., 717 A.2d 195 (Conn. 1998).
· cites it 14× “In any jury case where the court orders a decrease in the amount of the judgment or an increase in the amount of the judgment, the party aggrieved by the order of remittitur or additur may appeal as in any civil action. The appeal shall be on the issue of damages only, and…”
Semrau v. Herrick, 805 A.2d 125 (Conn. App. Ct. 2002).
· cites it 11× “Section 52-228a provides an aggrieved party with the right to appeal an order of additur.”
Johnson v. Chaves, 826 A.2d 1286 (Conn. App. Ct. 2003).
· cites it 4× “6 The plaintiff did not accept the remittitur and instead, filed this appeal pursuant to General Statutes § 52-228a. 7 The plaintiff claims that the court abused its discretion and invaded the province of the jury in ordering the $40,000 remittitur of noneconomic damages.”
Lombardi v. Cobb, 915 A.2d 911 (Conn. App. Ct. 2007).
· cites it 4× “[2] General Statutes § 52-228a provides that "[i]n any jury case where the court orders a decrease in the amount of the judgment or an increase in the amount of the judgment, the party aggrieved by the order of remittitur or additur may appeal as in any civil action.”
Civiello v. Owens-Corning Fiberglass Corp., 544 A.2d 158 (Conn. 1988).
· cites it 2× “” It should be noted that General Statutes § 52-228a provides expressly that in any jury case where the court orders a remittitur or an additur, the party aggrieved “may appeal as in any civil action.”
Peck v. Jacquemin, 491 A.2d 1043 (Conn. 1985).
“” This motion for additur was as follows: “MOTION FOR ADDITUR “The plaintiff, in conjunction with his motion to set aside the verdict, filed herewith, claiming that the verdict rendered in the above-entitled case is inadequate, and pursuant to § 52-228a of the General Statutes,…”
Schettino v. Labarba, 844 A.2d 923 (Conn. App. Ct. 2004).
· cites it 2× “General Statutes § 52-228a provides that a party aggrieved by an order of additur has the right to appeal from that order.”
Kegel v. McNeely, 476 A.2d 641 (Conn. App. Ct. 1984).
· cites it 2× “Although General Statutes § 52-228a contemplates a hearing on a motion to set aside a verdict in order to afford the trial court an opportunity to correct any claimed error upon which the motion is grounded, the failure of the plaintiff to provide the court with authority for…”
Morales v. Pentec, Inc., 749 A.2d 47 (Conn. App. Ct. 2000).
· cites it 2× “2d 158 (1988); General Statutes § 52-228a. Thus, the order is a final judgment for purposes of appeal.”
Preston v. Phelps Dodge Copper Prods. Co., 647 A.2d 364 (Conn. App. Ct. 1994).
· cites it 2× “General Statutes § 52-228a provides: “In any jury case where the court orders a decrease in the amount of the judgment or an increase in the amount of the judgment, the party aggrieved by the order of remittitur or additur may appeal as in any civil action.”
Silva v. Walgreen Co., 992 A.2d 1190 (Conn. App. Ct. 2010).
· cites it 2× “2 General Statutes § 52-228a provides: “In any jury case where the corut orders a decrease in the amount of a judgment or an increase in the amount of the judgment, the party aggrieved by the order of remittitur or additur may appeal as in any civil action.”
Maldonado v. Flannery, 238 A.3d 127 (Conn. App. Ct. 2020).
· cites it 2× “The appeal shall be on the issue of damages only, and judgment shall enter upon the verdict of liability and damages after the issue of damages is decided.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.