Case ID: ala-app_20/html/0510-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "SAMFORD, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

(103 So. 306)
    BEVILL v. WILKINS.
    (6 Div. 700.)
    (Court of Appeals of Alabama.
    March 17, 1925.)
    Appeal and error &wkey;>10l5(3) — Judgment granting new trial because verdict was against evidence not reversed, unless evidence plainly supports verdict.
    Where new trial is granted on ground that verdict is contrary to great weight of evidence, appellate court will not reverse, unless evidence plainly and palpably supports verdict.
    Appeal from Circuit Court, Walker County ; R. L. Blanton, Judge.
    Action by W. D. Wilkins against Herman Bevill. From a judgment granting plaintiff's motion for a new trial, defendant appeals.
    Affirmed.
    Ray & Co oner, of Jasper, for appellant.
    
      It was error to grant the motion for new trial upon the ground that the verdict was contrary to the weight of the evidence. Cobb v. Malone, 92 Ala. 630, 9 So. 738; Tenn. Co. v. Giles, 211 Ala. 44, 99 So. 84; Smith v. Hill, 180 Ala. 14, 60 So. 57; Salmon v. Salmon, 13 Ala. App. 510, 69 So. 304; B. R., L. & P. Co. v. Sprague, 196 Ala. 148, 72 So. 96; Mutual Loan Soc. v. Stowe, 15 Ala. App. 293, 73 So. 202; B. R. L. & P. Co. v. Friedman, 16 Ala. App. 221, '77 So. 597; Spurlock v. State, 17 Ala, App. 109, 82 So. 557.
    W. F. Finch, of Jasper, for appellee. -
    A judgment granting a new trial will not be reversed, unless the evidence plainly supports the verdict. Cobb v. Malone, 92 Ala. 630, 9 So. 738; Merrill v. Brantley, 133 Ala. 537, 31 So. 847; Smith v. Tombigbee, 141 Ala. 332, 37 So. 389; Rentz v. Bridges, 177 Ala. 616, 59 So. 63; Peyton v. Lewis, 10 Ala. App. 360, 64 So. 472.
   SAMFORD, J.

On the trial of the original case there was verdict and judgment for defendant. Within 30 days, and within the term of court plaintiff moved the court to set aside the judgment and for a new trial. This motion was granted, and from the judgment granting the motion is this appeal.

Among the grounds assigned in the motion was:

“The verdict of the jury is contrary to the great weight of the evidence in this cause.”

The judgment setting aside the verdict did not specify upon which of the grounds the motion was granted. Where a motion for new trial is granted upon the ground that the verdict is contrary to the great weight of the evidence, the appellate court will not reverse the judgment, unless the evidence in the cause plainly and palpably supports the verdict. Cobb v. Malone et al., 92 Ala. 630, 9 So. 738; Smith v. Tombigbee & N. Ry. Co., 141 Ala. 332, 37 So. 389; Mallory S. S. Co. v. Druhan, 16 Ala. App. 438, 78 So. 636. Under the above-cited decisions, and many others, the judgment must be affirmed.

Affirmed. 
      -ft — ,7?nr other oases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes