Define: Additur

Additur is a legal term referring to a judge’s decision to increase the amount of damages awarded by a jury in a civil case if the judge determines that the jury’s award was unreasonably low or inadequate. It allows the judge to add to the jury’s award without requiring a new trial or appeal. Additur is typically used when the judge believes that the jury’s verdict was influenced by a mistake of law or fact, or if the damages awarded were insufficient to compensate the plaintiff for their losses. However, additur is not allowed in all jurisdictions, and its use may be subject to legal limitations and procedural requirements. In some jurisdictions, defendants may have the option to reject additur and instead request a new trial or appeal the verdict. Additur is intended to ensure that plaintiffs receive fair and just compensation for their injuries or losses in civil cases.

Additur is a legal term that refers to a judge’s power to increase the amount of damages awarded by a jury in a civil case. It allows the judge to review the jury’s decision and determine if the amount awarded is inadequate or excessive based on the evidence presented during the trial. If the judge finds that the jury’s award is insufficient, the judge can order an additur to increase the damages. However, if the judge finds that the jury’s award is excessive, the judge may order a remittitur to reduce the damages. Additur is not available in all jurisdictions and is subject to specific legal requirements and limitations.

An order made by a civil court to increase the compensation or damages that were awarded to the plaintiff in court by a jury. It can also refer to the actual increase, the procedure, or the power of the court to make this order. It is generally done to keep the plaintiff from appealing the compensation amount.

Additur is not allowed in all legal systems, but if it is allowed, it is done by the judge who is assessing punitive damages if they feel the damages are not sufficient. The judge may decide to increase damages if the defendant’s actions were especially heinous or if they want to send a message to future defendants. At the end of the case, the defendant is expected to pay the compensation amount, generally in a lump-sum payment. If the defendant does not pay, they may be compelled to pay through a wage garnishment. In the United States, for example, federal judges cannot issue an additur.

The power of the trial court to assess damages or increase the amount of an inadequate award made by jury verdict, as a condition of a denial of a motion for a new trial, with the consent of the defendant, whether or not the plaintiff consents to such action,. This is not allowed in the federal system.

Damages assessed by a jury may be set aside when the amount is shocking to the judicial conscience—so grossly inadequate that it constitutes a miscarriage of justice—or when it appears that the jury was influenced by prejudice, corruption, passion, or mistake.

For example, a 61-year-old woman was mugged in the hallway of her apartment building after the landlord failed to replace a broken lock on the back service entrance. She sustained a broken shoulder, a broken arm, and numerous cuts and bruises. Her medical bills amounted to more than $2,500. She sued the landlord for his negligent maintenance of the building, and the jury returned a verdict in her favour but awarded damages of only $2,500. Her attorney immediately moved for a new trial on the ground that the verdict was shockingly inadequate. The trial judge ruled that the jury could not possibly have calculated compensation for the woman’s pain and suffering, an item that should have been included under state law. The trial judge, therefore, awarded an additur of $15,000. The effect of this order was to put the defendant on notice that he must either pay the $15,000 in addition to the verdict of $2,500 or a new trial would be held. The defendant weighed the disadvantages of investing time and money in a new trial against the risk of an even higher award of monetary damages by a sympathetic jury. He consented to the addition.

An addition is not justified solely because the amount of damage is low. For example, damages of $10,000 certainly will not compensate the family of a forty-four-year-old man who had been steadily employed as a plumber until he was permanently disabled in an auto accident. In such a case, however, the jury could have found that the plaintiff’s negligence contributed to the cause of the accident and reduced the damages proportionately, as is permitted in most states.

An award of additur is not permitted in every state, nor is it allowed in the federal courts. Under the rules that govern procedure in the federal courts, a trial judge has the power to set aside a verdict for a plaintiff on the ground that the damages awarded are clearly inadequate, but then the judge’s only recourse is to grant a new trial.

This site contains general legal information but does not constitute professional legal advice for your particular situation. Persuing this glossary does not create an attorney-client or legal adviser relationship. If you have specific questions, please consult a qualified attorney licensed in your jurisdiction.

This glossary post was last updated: 10th April 2024.