Dupont denied writ of mandamus in whisnant case

Texas â€" DuPont has sought and been denied a writ of mandamus in their appeal against the overturning of the verdict in a recent asbestos-related lawsuit. DuPont won the case, but the plaintiff’s attorney asked that the verdict be overturned. During February and March, the jury in the six-week Whisnant vs. DuPont asbestos trial listened to plaintiff claims that Willis Whisnant had developed mesothelioma as a result of negligence on the part of contractual employer DuPont. The jury decided in favor of the defendant. Subsequently the plaintiff’s attorney, Glen Morgan, asked that the verdict be set aside and a new trial granted. Morgan filed a Plaintiff’s Motion for a New Trial stating that the jury’s decision was “contrary to the overwhelming weight and preponderance of the evidence.” The sixteen-page motion argued that the jury may have been unduly influenced by an online and print publication, “The Southeast Texas Record,” which publishes articles about local court events. Morgan claimed that the newspaper, which is owned by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, deliberately publishes “anti-plaintiff propaganda,” and that articles about the Whisnant trial which were clearly favorable to DuPont may have contributed to the jury’s decision. DuPont defense attorney M.C. Carrington defended the jury’s verdict, saying that “…the jury had every reason to reach the decision that they did. There is not any way that the court will find that there is insufficient evidence to support the jury finding.” Carrington also said that there was not enough evidence to determine whether or not the jury was unduly influenced by The Southeast Texas Record’s coverage of the trial. Judge Donald Floyd evidently agreed with Glen Morgan, overturning the verdict and paving the way for a new trial. The next step for DuPont was filing a writ of mandamus in appeals court. The writ is filed in an appeals court in an attempt to correct a lower court decision in which it is alleged there has been an abuse of discretion. DuPont attorneys wrote in the writ that “speculative inference that jurors read news articles about the case during the trial” should not be grounds for overturning a verdict, and that there was no proof that any of the newspaper’s articles had any influence on the jury’s decision, or even that any jurors had read the articles. DuPont’s attorneys also said that Judge Floyd should be forced to give a reason for granting a new trial to the plaintiff. The appeals court, however, has denied DuPont’s request, saying that “the discretion and judgment of the trial court in granting a new trial cannot be controlled or directed by mandamus.” (Source: Asbestos and Mesothelioma News)