In Oakes v. Patel,1 decided April 2, 2013, the Court of Appeals held that a party who wants to challenge on appeal a trial court’s post-verdict order conditionally increasing or reducing the amount of damages awarded by a jury (an additur or remittitur) must do so before a new trial on damages takes place. The court in Oakes also held that an order granting or denying a motion to amend "necessarily affects the final judgment," so as to qualify for review under CPLR 5501(a)(1), when it relates to a proposed new pleading that contains a new cause of action or defense.
Oakes involved a medical malpractice action in which the jury awarded approximately $4 million for certain elements of damages. The plaintiffs filed a post-trial motion to set aside the verdict on the ground that the awards for the relevant elements were inadequate. The trial court granted the plaintiffs’ motion for an additur, and ordered a new trial on the issue of damages unless the defendants stipulated to an increased award of $17.4 million for these elements. The defendants refused to so stipulate.
