This meant that Sprint did not have to pay any damages as a result of the initial trial, said Matthew Sullivan, a Sprint spokesman.
"We're baffled as to why a new trial was granted when the jury did exactly as it was asked to do," Sullivan
"There was no accusation or evidence of jury misconduct, and fairness and due process principles do not entitle unsuccessful plaintiffs' attorneys to a "do over.
This order gives the plaintiffs' attorneys a second bite of the apple to attempt an award of damages that they did not accomplish with the evidence presented during the first trial."
While a new trial will reconsider the issue of economic damages, it will not revisit the jury's finding that "subscribers breached their contracts with Sprint when they terminated early," Sullivan