Louisiana
How Dimick v. Schiedt applies in Louisiana: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Civil Procedure.
In Louisiana, the principles established in Dimick v. Schiedt regarding excessive damages and jury discretion influence the state's standards on remittitur and additur. Louisiana courts provide a unique framework focusing on the balance between protecting jury discretion and ensuring that awards are not manifestly excessive.
In Louisiana, any award deemed 'excessive' may be adjusted through a process involving the trial court's discretion, aligning with the state’s procedural standards under La. C.C.P. art. 1814, which governs remittitur.
The court upheld the trial court's remittitur of a jury award for damages, affirming the principle that awards must not be manifestly excessive.
This case illustrates the Louisiana standards for determining when a damage award is excessive, emphasizing the court's role in reviewing jury verdicts.
The court reduced a jury's award, reinforcing the application of the remittitur doctrine as influenced by Dimick.
Unlike the federal standard that allows for additur and remittitur, Louisiana's approach is more restrictive in its application, emphasizing the necessity that any adjustment must strictly adhere to statutory guidelines. This reflects Louisiana's civil law heritage, which contrasts with the federal common law framework.
Understanding remittitur and additur in the context of excessive damages is crucial for the Louisiana bar exam, particularly in essays concerning Civil Procedure.