Which of the following is NOT a ground for a new trial under Rule 59?

• A. Manifest disregard by jury of court instructions
• B. Excessive or inadequate damages given under passion or prejudice
• C. Insufficiency of evidence to justify verdict or verdict contrary to law
• D. Improper joinder of parties

Answer: (D)

Rule 59 authorizes a new trial when the trial itself produced an incorrect result due to legal error, or when the verdict doesn’t reflect the evidence properly—such as weighing the evidence improperly, or damages that are excessive or inadequate.

A jury’s manifest disregard of the court’s instructions is treated as a trial error that can justify a new trial because it shows the verdict rested on legal standards the jury ignored. Likewise, a verdict that is not supported by the evidence, or that conflicts with controlling law, fits squarely within Rule 59’s grounds for granting a new trial. Damages are excessive or inadequate when the amount awarded is clearly wrong given the evidence and the applicable standards.

Improper joinder of parties, on the other hand, concerns whether the parties were properly joined in the same action. That is a pleading or joinder issue, and if there’s a problem, it would be addressed by severance, dismissal, or related procedural steps rather than by granting a new trial after the verdict. So improper joinder is not a ground for a new trial under Rule 59.