Case ID: ala_200/html/0567-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "McCLELLAN, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

(76 South. 925)
    G. C. SHAW & SON v. DU BOSE.
    (5 Div. 677.)
    (Supreme Court of Alabama.
    Nov. 29, 1917.)
    Appeal and Error <&wkey;9T9(2) — Review — New Trial.
    Where the lower court grants a new trial, on the ground that the verdict is contrary to the evidence, its determination'will not be reviewed, unless the evidence plainly and palpably supports .the verdict.
    (gx^-Por other oases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes
    
      Appeal from Circuit Court, Chilton County ; Leon McCord, Judge.
    Action between Sam Du Bose against G. C. Shaw & Son. There was a verdict for defendants and plaintiff being awarded a new trial, defendants appeal. Transferred from Court of Appeals under Acts 1911, p. 450, § 6.
    Affirmed.
    Middleton & Reynolds, of Clanton, for appellants.
    J. B. Atkinson and F. B. Collier, both of Clknton, for appellee.
   McCLELLAN, J.

This is an action to recover the statutory penalty for failure to enter on the margin of the record the satisfaction of a mortgage. Code, § 4898.. The appellee is the plaintiff, and the appellants the defendants. The court submitted the issues of fact to the jury, whereupon the jury returned a verdict in favor of the defendants. In response to motion for a new trial based, in substance/ upon* the idea that the verdict was contrary to the evidence, the court awarded a new trial. The rule established in this court is that:

“Decisions granting new trials will not be reviewed, unless the evidence plainly and palpably supports the verdict.” Cobb v. Malone, 92 Ala. 630, 635, 636, 9 South. 738, 740.

.So where a new 'trial is awarded on the stated ground, the question, in the appellate court, is whether the evidence “plainly and palpably” supported the verdict. A careful consideration of the conflicting evidence before the court cannot be here pronounced so strongly, plainly; palpably supportive of the verdict as to justify this court in reversing the action of the court in awarding a new trial.

Affirmed.

ANDERSON, C. J., and SAXRE and GARDNER, JJ., concur.