Case Name: FITZGERALD v. DODSON et al.
Court: United States District Court for the District of Columbia
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1928-04-28
Citations: 26 F.2d 522
Docket Number: Nos. 1372, 1373
Parties: FITZGERALD v. DODSON et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 26
Pages: 522–522

Head Matter:
FITZGERALD v. DODSON et al.
Court of Appeals of District of Columbia.
Submitted April 25, 1928.
Decided April 28, 1928.
Nos. 1372, 1373.
Thomas J. Fitzgerald, of Washington, D. C., for petitioner.
C. P. Henry, of Washington, D. C., for respondents.

Opinion:
ROBB, Associate Justice.
In these eases the application for writs of error is based on the refusal of the trial court to grant a new trial.
It is settled law in this court that the action of the trial court in granting or refusing a new trial is not reviewable. Columbia Ry. Co. v. Cruit, 20 App. D. C. 521; Price v. United States, 14 App. D. C. 391; Kelly v. Moore, 22 App. D. C. 9. Even where the motion for a new trial is based upon newly discovered evidence, the action of the trial court will not be disturbed, unless there has been a manifest abuse of discretion. Mandes v. Midgett, 49 App. D. C. 139, 261 F. 1019.
It results that these applications must be denied.