Lind v. Schenley Industries - 278 F.2d 79 (3d Cir. 1960)

Lind v. Schenley Industries

278 F.2d 79 (3d Cir. 1960)

I. Issue
Whether the trial court erred in granting the j.n.o.v. an a new trial.

II. Fact
P, Lind, alleged that D orally promised him an increase but then breached  that promise.  His then-secretary testified for P.  D's agents denied making the promises.

III Procedure
The jury found a contract; a damage award followed.  D moved both for j.n.o.v. and, alternatively, for a new trial.  The trial judge granted the j.n.o.v., and, in the alternative, a new trial.  P appealed.

IV. Reasoning
It if frequently stated that a motion for a new trial on certain ground ordinarily is non-reviewable because within the discretion of the trial court.  But this discretion must be exercised in accordance with ascertainable legal standards and if an appellate court is shown unusual circumstances which clearly indicate an abuse of discretion in that the trial court failed to apply correctly the proper standards, reversal is possible.

V. Holding
We conclude that the jury did believed the secretary's testimony and that the court below substituted its judgment for that of the jury on this issue and thereby abused its legal discretion.  Reversed and remanded.