In Re State of West Virginia Public Building Asbestos Litigation. (three Cases)

Summary

The court held that a trial judge has broad authority under Rule 59 to weigh evidence and witness credibility when setting aside a jury verdict and granting a new trial, and that appellate review is limited to abuse of discretion. It affirmed the new-trial order because the zero-damages verdict was potentially manifestly inadequate and the jury instructions were confusing, while requiring clarification on remand concerning product defect, liability, and damages. The court also held that statutes of limitation apply to the State, found no error in rejecting assumption of risk or in allowing successor-liability issues to proceed, and declined to address judicial disqualification under the applicable trial-court procedure. Justice Cleckley, concurring, would expressly overrule prior authority limiting a trial court's ability to weigh the persuasive quality of evidence on a new-trial motion.