do not address the issue at hand in this case. See Scagnelli v. Whiting, 554 F.Supp. 77, 81-82 (M.D.N.C.1982) (setting aside a compensatory damage award of $300,000 in a discrimination and First Amendment case); Dossett v. First State Bank, 399 F.3d 940, 947 (8th Cir.2005) (concluding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in ordering a new trial when the compensatory damage award was $1.5 million); Bush v. Texaco, Inc., 504 F.Supp. 670, 672-73 (D.C.Tex.1981) (setting aside a $406,000 award for lost wages and pain and suffering in a personal injury case where there was evidence that the injury could be cured in a relatively short time with surgery and plaintiff suffered only mild physical pain); Richardson v. Commc’ns. Workers of Am., 530 F.2d 126, 129-30 (8th Cir.1976) (<HOLDING>). I also note that Wulfs conclusion that an
holding trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding violation was willful and substantial holding trial court did not abuse its discretion by ruling based only on affidavits holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in ordering a new trial based on a 250000 award for a mental distress claim holding that trial court did not abuse its discretion in overruling motion for new trial on perjury grounds holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by ordering a separate trial for the counterclaims where the convenience of the parties would be served