"The standard of review for the grant or denial of a motion for a JNOV is de novo." Wilty v. Alpha , 99 So.3d 830, 833–34 (¶ 18) (Miss. Ct. App. 2012) (citing InTown Lessee Assocs. v. Howard , 67 So.3d 711, 718 (¶ 22) (Miss. 2011) ).
Nor did Welting introduce evidence showing “specific suffering [by Carlisle] during a specific time frame.” Rutter, 2020 WL 75074, at *5; see Wilty v. Alpha, 99 So.3d 830, 836 (Miss. Ct. App. 2012) (insufficient evidence to support wife's emotional distress award based on testimony of husband and wife where “[t]here were no specific examples, specific time frames, or specific details of suffering[, n]o one testified how being really unhappy and depressed affected [wife's] life or those around her[, n]o testimony reflected how her depression manifested itself[, and t]he jury was not given the specific date she visited the psychiatrist nor any record of that visit”). And since Welting's “generalizations ... are not sufficient,” her testimony that Carlisle was “under so much stress and worry” that it “just about killed him” is insufficient to support an emotional distress award.
A motion for JNOV challenges the legal sufficiency of the evidence, and its grant or denial is reviewed de novo. Wilty v. Alpha, 99 So. 3d 830, 833-34 (¶18) (Miss. Ct. App. 2012) (quoting InTown Lessee Assocs. v. Howard, 67 So. 3d 711, 718 (¶22) (Miss. 2011)). The appellate court "will affirm the denial of a JNOV motion if there is substantial evidence to support the verdict." Id.
Wilty v. Alpha, 99 So.3d 830, 833-34 (¶18) (Miss. Ct. App. 2012) (quoting InTown Lessee Assocs. v. Howard, 67 So.3d 711, 718 (¶22) (Miss. 2011)). The appellate court "will affirm the denial of a JNOV motion if there is substantial evidence to support the verdict." Id.
"The standard of review for the grant or denial of a motion for a JNOV is de novo." Witty v. Alpha, 99 So. 3d 830, 833-34 (¶18) (Miss. Ct. App. 2012) (citing InTown Lessee Assocs. LLC v. Howard, 67 So. 3d 711, 718 (¶22) (Miss. 2011)). "A motion for JNOV is a challenge to the legal sufficiency of the evidence, and this Court will affirm the denial of a JNOV [motion] if there is substantial evidence to support the verdict."
¶26. "The standard of review for the grant or denial of a motion for a JNOV is de novo." Wilty v. Alpha, 99 So.3d 830, 833-34 (¶18) (Miss. Ct. App. 2012) (citing InTown Lessee Assocs. LLC v. Howard, 67 So.3d 711, 718 (¶22) (Miss. 2011)). "A motion for JNOV is a challenge to the legal sufficiency of the evidence, and this Court will affirm the denial of a JNOV [motion] if there is substantial evidence to support the verdict."
The denial of a motion for a new trial is reviewed for abuse of discretion. Wilty v. Alpha , 99 So. 3d 830, 834 (¶23) (Miss. Ct. App. 2012). Whether to grant or deny a new trial motion is within the discretion of the trial court.
¶ 14. Maslon relies on Wilty v. Alpha, 99 So.3d 830 (Miss.Ct.App.2012), to substantiate her claim that the damages were too general to support the award. However in Wilty, Wilty alluded to the fact that the wife was very unhappy and had been prescribed Zoloft.
Additionally, Maslon argues that the number of times Maslon's cows trespassed onto Brown's pasture is essential in the itemization of damages. ¶14. Maslon relies on Wilty v. Alpha, 99 So. 3d 830 (Miss. Ct. App. 2012), to substantiate her claim that the damages were too general to support the award. However in Wilty, Wilty alluded to the fact that the wife was very unhappy and had been prescribed Zoloft.