Case ID: ohio-law-abs_4/html/0836-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "DAY, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

No. 1070
    No. 19712
    Harris E. Mason v. E. C. Tremayne.
    Error to the Court of Appeals of Cuyahoga County.
    841. NEW TRIAL — Where new trial after term is sought on the ground of false testimony on part of successful party or any witness in his behalf, new trial should be denied unless record affirmatively shows that ordinary prudence could not have anticipated such false testimony and that guilty party was convicted; or if newly discovered evidence is offered as a ground, that such evidence, it must be shown, could not with reasonable diligence have-been procured at the trial.
   DAY, J.

Where a party seeks a new trial after term, upon the ground of false testimony on the part of the successful party or any witness in his behalf, pursuant to paragraph 10 of Section 11631, General Code, the record must affirmatively show that ordinary prudence could not have anticipated or guarded against such false testimony and that the guilty party has been convicted; if newly discovered evidence, niaaterial for the party applying is urged as a ground for a new trial, it must be shown that such newly discovered evidence could not with reasonable diligence have been known and produced at the trial. In an absence of such showing, a new trial should be denied.

Judgment affirmed.

Marshall, CJ., Jones, Matthias, Allen, Kinkade and Robinson, JJ., concur.