United States Eighth Circuit

In an action brought under the Federal Odometer Act, district court judgment denying defendant's motion for a new trial is affirmed where: 1) the damages award against defendant is supported by substantial evidence; 2) the court did not err in refusing to bifurcate the case into liability and damages proceedings as it was a relatively simple case involving only one claim and one defendant that did not warrant bifurcation; 3) there was no error in the court's verdict form or in the jury instructions; 4) the court did not abuse its discretion denying defendant's motions for continuance; 5) the court's disputed comments during trial did not prejudice the jury or constitute judicial misconduct; and 6) the court did not err in awarding attorneys' fees award or in awarding plaintiff prejudgment interest.

Appellate Information

• Decided 07/13/2009
• Published 07/13/2009

Judges

• CLEVENGER, Circuit Judge., Before LOKEN, Chief Judge, EBEL  and CLEVENGER, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Eighth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• DeWayne A. Johnston, Grand Forks, ND, for appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Jonathan Christian Miesen, Minneapolis, MN, for appellee.