With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". 493 So.2d 1374 (Ala.1986), the trial court properly considered the factors set out in Green Oil Co. v. Hornsby, 539 So.2d 218, 223-24 (Ala.1989). The trial court determined that the jury’s award was not tainted by bias, passion, prejudice, or any other improper motive and that the verdict was not excessive. The trial court “is better positioned to decide whether the verdict is so flawed.” Hammond, 493 So.2d at 1378. We defer to the trial court’s determination in the absence of evidence that the verdict was “plainly and palpably wrong and unjust.” Carter v. Henderson, 598 So.2d 1350, 1354 (Ala.1992). CEC presented no such evidence. We note that the punitive damages award is less than the compensatory damages award. After examining the record, analyzing CEC’s culpability, co (Ala.1983) (<HOLDING>); Smiths Water Authority v. City of Phenix

A: holding that an argument not raised before the bankruptcy court will not be considered for the first time on appeal
B: holding that this court need not address the merits of an argument raised for the first time on appeal
C: holding that an issue not raised in the trial court cannot be raised for the first time on appeal
D: holding that appellate court will not normally address issue raised for the first time on appeal
B.