IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
October 15, 2009
MARCUS J. (MARC) MATHEWS, PLAINTIFF,
BIG BEAR AMERICAN MADE CHOPPERS, INC., DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: David E. Peebles U.S. Magistrate Judge
Following the entry of judgment in this action on August 5, 2009, based upon a jury verdict returned on May 27, 2009, awarding plaintiff in damages and prejudgment interest as against defendant Big Bear American Made Choppers, Inc. ("Big Bear") in the sum of $457,557.05, Dkt. No. 276, plaintiff Marcus J. (Marc) Mathews has moved pursuant to Rule 59 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for a new trial, limited to the issue of damages for pain and suffering, and for remittitur reducing the jury's apportionment of fault to Anorack/Anondize Rack, Inc. ("Anorack"), a settling defendant, from forty-five to zero percent, or, alternatively, a new trial limited to the issue of apportionment between Big Bear and Anorack.*fn1
Oral argument was conducted in connection with plaintiff's motion on September 16, 2009, at which time I issued a bench decision granting that portion of the motion addressing the question of damages for past and future pain and suffering, but reserving decision with regard to the apportionment issue. During a subsequent hearing conducted on October 14, 2009, I also granted plaintiff's motion for a new trial on the question of apportionment of liability as between defendant Big Bear and the settling defendant, Anorack.
Based upon the foregoing, it is hereby
ORDERED as follows:
1) The portion of plaintiff's motion seeking a new trial on the issues of damages for pain and suffering and apportionment between Big Bear and Anorack, Dkt. No. 280, is GRANTED, and plaintiff's motion is otherwise DENIED;
2) The judgment entered in this case on August 5, 2009, Dkt. No. 279, is hereby VACATED, and a new judgment shall enter following the retrial of plaintiff's damage claim for pain and suffering and the apportionment question;
3) A jury trial on the issues referenced above will be held, tentatively to commence on January 11, 2010;
4) The clerk is directed to promptly forward copies of this order to the parties electronically, pursuant to the court's local rules.