Legal Definitions - cure by verdict

Cure by verdict is a legal principle that states a minor flaw or omission in a party's initial legal documents (such as a complaint or answer) can be overlooked or corrected if the issue was thoroughly discussed, presented with evidence, and ultimately decided by the jury during the trial. Essentially, if the jury's decision clearly shows that they considered and resolved the point, the initial technical error in the paperwork is considered "cured" by that verdict. This prevents a case from being overturned later due to a minor defect in the initial pleadings, as the trial process itself demonstrated that the issue was fully litigated and understood by all parties.

• Example 1: Contract Dispute

  Imagine a business sues a supplier for breach of contract. In their initial complaint, the business accidentally omits the exact date the contract was signed, simply stating it was "in early 2022." During the trial, however, both sides present extensive emails, meeting minutes, and testimony that clearly establish the precise date of contract formation. The jury hears all this evidence and ultimately finds the supplier liable for breaching the contract.

  In this scenario, the initial omission of the specific date in the complaint is "cured by verdict." Even though the paperwork had a minor defect, the fact that the exact date was thoroughly litigated and decided by the jury means the supplier cannot later argue the verdict should be thrown out because of the missing date in the original complaint. The trial process clarified and resolved the ambiguity.

• Example 2: Personal Injury Claim

  Consider a personal injury lawsuit where the plaintiff's initial complaint vaguely describes their injuries as "severe back pain and limited mobility," without specifying a precise medical diagnosis like a herniated disc. Throughout the trial, medical experts from both sides testify in detail, presenting MRI scans, doctor's reports, and explaining the exact nature of the plaintiff's herniated disc, its cause, and its impact on mobility. The jury, having heard all the detailed medical evidence, awards compensation specifically for the herniated disc and related suffering.

  Here, the initial vagueness in the complaint regarding the specific type of injury is "cured by verdict." The jury clearly understood and decided on the specific injury (the herniated disc) based on the comprehensive medical evidence presented at trial, making the initial minor pleading defect irrelevant to the validity of the outcome.

• Example 3: Property Damage Case

  A homeowner sues a landscaping company for damage to their property, alleging "improper drainage leading to water damage." The initial complaint doesn't specify the exact location or type of drainage issue. However, during the trial, engineers and landscapers provide detailed testimony, diagrams, and photographs showing that the company installed a culvert incorrectly, causing water to pool and damage the foundation in a specific area. The jury, after reviewing all the evidence, finds the landscaping company responsible for the foundation damage.

  The initial general allegation of "improper drainage" is "cured by verdict." The detailed evidence presented at trial fully clarified the specific nature and location of the drainage problem and the resulting damage. The jury's decision reflects that they understood and resolved these specific issues, despite the initial lack of detail in the homeowner's complaint.