Court Opinion

ID: 9738791
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 20:02:45.069093+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:24:08.461226
License: Public Domain

Black, J.
(dissenting). I am unable to agree that the trial judge abused the relevantly broad discretion the law confides to those who preside where things happen that are visible to the human eye yet never find their way into typed or printed pages. I am concerned, to be perfectly frank about it, that 1 very broad rule of discretion applies — or at least seems to apply — in this Court when the plaintiff new trial seeker has lost in the juryroom, and another more restricted rule of “sound” judicial discretion applies when the defendant new trial mover has lost in that room. Compare the current opinion of the Chief Justice with that of the Court in Patzke v. Chesapeake & Ohio R. Co., 368 Mich 190.
The rule should be the same whether a plaintiff or a defendant succeeds below with his motion for new trial. I therefore vote to affirm this order for new trial on strength of principles approved by unanimous vote in Patzke, supra.
Kavanagh, J., concurred with Black, J.
O’Hara, J., took no part in the decision of this case.