Opinion ID: 1760745
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Clear preponderance

Text: Mr. Bearden recognizes that, when a trial court has refused to grant a new trial in response to an argument that the verdict is clearly against the preponderance of the evidence, the test on appeal is whether there is any evidence to support the jury's verdict. When a motion for a new trial is made on the ground that the verdict is clearly contrary to the preponderance of the evidence, Ark. R. Civ. P. 59(a)(6), we affirm if the verdict is supported by substantial evidence, giving the verdict the benefit of all reasonable inferences permissible in accordance with the proof. Patterson v. Odell, 322 Ark. 394, 401, 909 S.W.2d 648, 652 (1995). It is within the province of the jury to believe or disbelieve the testimony of any witness. Id. at 402, 909 S.W.2d at 652. Given the fact that the only evidence as to what happened to cause the accident was Mr. Sims's version of the facts, we cannot say that the verdict in favor of Mr. Sims and Grobmeyer was clearly against the preponderance of the evidence. Affirmed. BROWN, J., not participating.