108 A.3d 1023
R.I.2015Background
- Barroom altercation at Post 27 led to plaintiff Bitgood’s severe injuries.
- Jury found Post 27 negligent and Bitgood 20% comparatively negligent; total award was $448,130 before remittitur and interest.
- Trial court denied Post 27’s motion for new trial and for remittitur; appeal followed.
- Record shows policy changes after the incident; staff were instructed to call police in broader circumstances after trial.
- Appellate court affirms Superior Court judgment, applying deferential standard of review for new-trial/remittitur rulings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the denial of the new-trial motion was correct. | Bitgood contends evidence favored a new trial due to conflicting credibility. | Post 27 argues evidence was not evenly balanced and the trial court erred. | Affirmed; evidence was evenly balanced and trial judge acted properly. |
| Whether remittitur was properly denied to adjust liability. | (Not explicitly stated in opinion); challenge to apportionment. | Jury misapportioned negligence against plaintiff. | Affirmed; remittitur denial upheld based on thorough analysis of comparative negligence. |
Key Cases Cited
- Manning v. Bellafiore, 991 A.2d 399 (R.I. 2010) (standard for evaluating trial court’s new-trial decision; evidence may be evenly balanced)
- Connor v. Schlemmer, 996 A.2d 98 (R.I. 2010) (great weight given to trial justice’s decision on new-trial motion)
- Seddon v. Duke, 884 A.2d 413 (R.I. 2005 (mem.)) (standard for considering conflicting evidence on appeal)
- Murray v. Bromley, 945 A.2d 330 (R.I. 2008) (trial court may infer credibility and select among inconsistent testimony)
- Bourdon’s, Inc. v. Ecin Industries, Inc., 704 A.2d 747 (R.I. 1997) (teaching on essential factual findings in review of trial court rulings)
- Cotrona v. Johnson & Wales College, 501 A.2d 728 (R.I. 1985) (remittitur power to correct excessive or misapportioned damages or liability)
- Lennon v. Dacomed Corp., 901 A.2d 582 (R.I. 2006) (remittitur review—whether apportionment reflects true merits and substantial justice)