Case Name: CRASSLEY v. McARDLE
Court: New York Supreme Court, General Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1893-12-06
Citations: 26 N.Y.S. 420
Docket Number: 
Parties: CRASSLEY v. McARDLE.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 26
Pages: 420–421

Head Matter:
(74 Hun, 133.)
CRASSLEY v. McARDLE.
(Supreme Court, General Term, Third Department.
December 6, 1893.)
Appeal—Weight op Evidence.
A verdict rendered on conflicting evidence will not be disturbed on appeal, unless the preponderance of evidence is so great as to indicate passion, prejudice, or corruption.
Appeal from Albany county court.
Action by Herman Crassley against Patrick J. McArdle to recover money alleged to be due on a contract. From a judgment entered on a verdict in favor of plaintiff for $172.48 damages and costs, and from an order denying a motion for a new trial, defendant appeals.
Affirmed.
Argued before MAYHAM, P. J., and PUTNAM and HERRICK, JJ.
Countryman & DuBois, (P. E. DuBois, of counsel,) for appellant.
O’Brien & Addington, (George Addington, of counsel,) for respondent.

Opinion:
HERRICK, J.
I have carefully read the testimony in this case, and, while the preponderance of the evidence seems to be in favor of the defendant, still, when it is considered that the jury had the witnesses before them to observe their appearance, and the manner of giving of their testimony, that preponderance is not so great as to indicate that the finding of the jury against the defendant was brought about by passion, prejudice, or corruption. There was a conflict of evidence, and it was for the jury to determine where the truth was. The exceptions taken during the progress of the trial are not sufficiently important to cause a reversal of the judgment. The judgment should be affirmed, with costs, there being no occasion for an opinion. All concur.