Filed August 3, 2009
THE JURY’S VERDICTS ARE IRRECONCILABLY INCONSISTENT “When a jury returns a factually inconsistent general verdict, the verdict cannot stand.” Turyna, 83 F.3d at 181; accord Deloughey v. City of Chicago, 422 F.3d 611, 617 (7th Cir. 2005); ABM Marking, Inc., 353 F.3d at 543-44; Frain v. Andy Frain, Inc., 660 F. Supp. 97, 100 (N.D. Ill. 1987). Allowing a verdict procured by jury confusion to stand is a “miscarriage of justice.”
Filed September 3, 2009
Case 1:02-cv-05893 Document 1656 Filed 09/03/2009 Page 20 of 85 - 3 - conscience.” Latino v. Kaizer, 58 F.3d 310, 315 (7th Cir. 1995); see also ABM Marking, Inc. v. Zanasi Fratelli, S.R.L., 353 F.3d 541, 545 (7th Cir. 2003). Thus, the Court will not set aside a jury verdict as long as a reasonable basis exists in the record to support the verdict.
Filed March 22, 2017
A party has the right to an accounting if a legal remedy would be inadequate and if there is one of the following: (1) a breach of a fiduciary relationship between the parties; (2) a need for discovery; (3) fraud; or (4) the existence of mutual accounts, which are of a complex nature. ABM Marking, Inc. v. Zanasi Fratelli, S.R.L., 353 F. 3d 541, 545 (7th Cir. 2003). Defendants meet these requirements and therefore have a right to an accounting.