Court Opinion

ID: 9865439
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-25 17:42:27.093805+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:47:39.597627
License: Public Domain

The Court, Gilpin, C. J.,

said it is incumbent upon a party who asks for a new trial on the ground of after discovered evidence, to satisfy the Court first, that the evidence has come to his knowledge since the trial; secondly, that it was not owing to a want of due diligence that he did not learn oí it in time for the trial, and in the next place, that it would probably produce a different verdict, it a new trial should be granted. If proper diligence had been exercised, the evidence now referred to, might in his opinion, have been known in time for the trial; and as to the objection to the competency of Sally McCrone as a witness, it was admitted either because the counsel had failed to except to its admissibility, or perhaps, it might have been because he was aware that the objection on the ground of her alleged interest in the result of the case, could as readily have been removed by a release of it.