Case ID: nys_84/html/1118-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "BLANCHARD, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

BALDERMAN, Respondent, v. METROPOLITAN ST. RY. CO., Appellant.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
    November 6, 1903.)
    Action by Emil Balderman against the Metropolitan Street Railway Company. From a judgment for plaintiff, and from an order denying a motion for a new trial, defendant appeals. Affirmed.
    H. A. Robinson (Arthur K. Wing and F. Angelo Gaynor, of counsel), for appellant. Droege & Schavrin, for respondent.
   BLANCHARD, J.

We do not think the verdict is grossly against the weight of evidence, nor even that it preponderates in favor of the defendant. The case was fairly submitted to the jury by the learned trial court, and the jury resolved the conflict in the evidence in favor of the plaintiff. As there is evidence to sustain the verdict, we do not think it should be disturbed. The judgment and order must be affirmed, with costs. All concur.