{"data":{"id":"us-mi/mich.-comp.-laws-600.6098","jurisdiction":"us-mi","citation":"Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6098","heading":"Review of verdict in action alleging medical malpractice or personal injury action; duties of judge; reinstatement of original verdict; affirming orders and judgments granting additur or remittitur.","body":"Sec. 6098.\n\nA judge presiding over an action alleging medical malpractice shall review each verdict to determine if the limitation on noneconomic damages provided for in section 1483 applies. If the limitation applies, the court shall set aside any amount of noneconomic damages in excess of the amount specified in section 1483.\n\nA judge presiding over a personal injury action shall review each verdict returned by the jury and shall do 1 of the following:\n\nConcur with the award.\n\nUpon motion by any party, within 21 days of entry of the judgment of the court, grant a new trial to all or some of the parties, on all or some issues, whenever their substantial rights are materially affected, for any of the following reasons:\n\nIrregularity in the proceedings of the court, jury, or prevailing party.\n\nAn order of the court or abuse of discretion which denied the moving party a fair trial.\n\nMisconduct of the jury or the prevailing party.\n\nExcessive or inadequate damages appearing to have been influenced by passion or prejudice.\n\nA verdict clearly or grossly inadequate or excessive.\n\nA verdict or decision against the great weight of the evidence or contrary to law.\n\nMaterial evidence, newly discovered, which could not with reasonable diligence have been discovered and produced at trial.\n\nError of law occurring in the proceedings or mistake of fact by the court.\n\nOther grounds as may be provided for by court rule.\n\nWithin 21 days after entry of a judgment, the court on its own initiative may order a new trial for any of the reasons set forth in subdivision (b). The order shall specify the grounds on which the order is based.\n\nIf the court finds that the only error in the trial is the inadequacy or excessiveness of the verdict, the court may grant a new trial unless, within 14 days, the nonmoving party consents in writing to the entry of judgment in an amount found by the court to be the lowest or highest amount the evidence will support.\n\nIf the moving party appeals, the written consent entered under subsection (2)(d) in no way prejudices the nonmoving party's argument on appeal that the original verdict was correct. If the nonmoving party prevails on appeal, the original verdict may be reinstated by the appellate court.\n\nAll orders and judgments of the circuit court granting additur or remittitur shall be affirmed on appeal unless the trial judge committed an abuse of discretion.","path":["MI Code","Chapter 600","Act Act-236-of-1961"],"source_url":"https://www.legislature.mi.gov/Laws/MCL?objectName=mcl-600-6098","current_through":"2026-08-14","vintage":"open-us-law v2026.08, retrieved 2026-09-14","retrieved_at":"2026-09-14T18:32:31Z","sha256":"823c34635c3872df1ea61e48b0ea664592c8e279c309ef466bb598f4467982eb","source_id":"us-mi","stale":false,"prev":"us-mi/mich.-comp.-laws-600.6097","next":"us-mi/mich.-comp.-laws-600.6101"},"notice":"GroundRules: Original legal text. Not legal advice."}