Seventh Amendment To The United States Constitution - Re-examination of Facts

Re-examination of Facts

The Re-Examination Clause of the Seventh Amendment states: "In suits at common law, ... no fact tried by jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law." This clause forbids any court from reexamining or overturning any factual determinations made by a jury, unless the factual determinations are clearly erroneous. Determination of legal issues by a jury are subject to Appellate review. Justice Samuel Nelson wrote the opinion of the Supreme Court in The Justices v. Murray, 76 U.S. 9 Wall. 274 (1869), which applied the Re-Examination Clause to the states. In his opinion Nelson quoted Justice Joseph Story to explain the modes to reexamine facts tried by juries according to Common Law: “Mr. Justice Story referring to this part of the amendment, observed that it was 'a prohibition to the courts of the United States to re-examine any facts tried by a jury in any other manner .' He further observed that 'the only modes known to the common law to re-examine such facts was the granting of a new trial by the court where the issue was tried, or the award of a venire facias de novo, by the appellate court, for some error of law that had intervened in the proceedings.'”

The Re-Examination Clause applies not only to federal courts, but also to "a case tried before a jury in a state court and brought to the Supreme Court on appeal."

As common law provided, the judge could set aside (or nullify) a jury verdict when the judge decided that the verdict was contrary to the evidence or the law. Common law precluded the judge from himself entering a verdict; a new trial, with a new jury, was the only course permissible. In Slocum v. New York Insurance Co. (1913), the Supreme Court upheld this rule. Later cases have undermined Slocum, but generally only when the evidence is overwhelming, or if a specific law provides narrow guidelines by which there can be no reasonable question as to the required outcome, may the court enter "judgment as a matter of law" or otherwise set aside the jury's findings.