Case ID: nys_147/html/1143-04.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

SPAULDING, Respondent, v. BRITTON, Appellant.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.
    March 18, 1914.)
    Action by George T. Spaulding against Willis N. Britton.
   PER CURIAM.

Judgment and order revers-ad, and new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide event. Held, that the verdict was grossly excessive, and that while it was within the discretion of the trial court to grant a new trial, unless the plaintiff stipulated to reduce the verdict (Holmes v. Jones, 121 N. Y. 461, 467, 24 N. E. 701; Riker v. Clopton, 83 App. Div. 310, 82 N. Y. Supp. 65), the exercise of that discretion in this case failed to purge the verdict of its excessive attributes.

ROBSON and MERRELL, JJ., concur, upon the ground, also, that the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. KRUSE, P. J., dissents, and votes for affirmance.