Case ID: minn_36/html/0550-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Gileillan, G. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

John Taylor vs. Day Spaulding.
    May 12, 1887.
    Mew Trial — Verdict against Evidence. — Order setting aside a verdict, as not justified by the evidence, sustained; following rule in Hicks v. Stone, 13 Minn. 398, (434.)
    Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the district court for Le Sueur county, Macdonald, J., presiding, granting a new trial, after a verdict for plaintiff.
    
      W. Boright and if. J. Peck, for appellant.
    
      Thos. Hessian and Caldwell & Parker, for respondent.
   Gileillan, G. J.

The rule laid down in Hicks v. Stone, 13 Minn. 398, (434,) that, to justify us in reversing an order of the trial court granting a new trial on the ground that the verdict is not sustained by tbe evidence, we must feel satisfied that the preponderance of the evidence is manifestly and palpably in favor of the verdict, and followed in many cases since, disposes of this case. Upon reading over the evidence we cannot say that there is any preponderance in favor of the verdict.

Order affirmed.