Case ID: f_166/html/0936-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "HOLLAND, District Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

JEFFERIS v. MERRITT & CO.
    (Circuit Court, E. D. Pennsylvania.
    January 8, 1909.)
    No. 34.
    Refusal of New Trial.
    A new trial will not be granted, where the vital question in issue was as to the construction placed on an ambiguous contract by the parties, and such question was determined by the jury under proper instructions and on evidence which supported their verdict.
    On Motion for New Trial.
    John Weaver, for plaintiff.
    George Q. Horwitz, for defendant.
   HOLLAND, District Judge.

Thirteen reasons are filed in this case why a new trial should be granted. The important fact at issue in the case was the construction placed upon a contract written in ambiguous language, which had been acted upon for about five years, and it was a question which construction had controlled the actions of the parties. This question was left to the jury under proper instructions, and we are convinced the verdict is justified by the evidence.

Motion for a new trial overruled.