Case Name: William T. Donovan, plaintiff in error, v. Rufus Yard, defendant in error
Court: Nebraska Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Nebraska
Decision Date: 1884-01
Citations: 16 Neb. 33
Docket Number: 
Parties: William T. Donovan, plaintiff in error, v. Rufus Yard, defendant in error.
Judges: The other judges concur.
Reporter: Nebraska Reports
Volume: 16
Pages: 33–34

Head Matter:
William T. Donovan, plaintiff in error, v. Rufus Yard, defendant in error.
Conflicting Testimony. Where there is a direct conflict in the testimony, and the only question presented is the credibilty of witnesses, the verdict of a jury will not be disturbed.
Error to the district court for Lancaster county. Tried below before Pound, J.
J. H. Foxworthy, for plaintiff in error.
A. J. Sawyer, for defendant in error.

Opinion:
Reese. .T,
The only question before the court'in this case is whether or not 1¿he verdict is supported by the evidence. All that need be said is that although the testimony is not entirely satisfactory still we think it sufficient to sustain the finding of the jury. The question involved'is a question of fact, and to a great extent depends upon the degree of credit to be given to the witnesses. The testimony of plaintiff's witness is in direct conflict with 'the testimony of the defendant, and it is evident that both cannot be true. This being the case, the jury were the sole judges of their credibility, and the verdict must stand. O'Leary, v. Iskey, 12 Neb., 136. High v. Merchants' Bank, 6 Neb., 155.
The judgment of the district court is therefore affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
The other judges concur.