Bauer v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Bauer v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co.

29 Misc. 636, 61 N.Y.S. 164

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York·Decided November 15, 1899·Published

Opinion

Ereedmatt, P. J.

After the rendition of a verdict in favor of the plaintiff herein, the trial judge, for reasons stated by him in his order, set aside the verdict as being against the weight of evidence and ordered a new trial. The question whether the verdict is against the weight of evidence is one the determination of which rests in the sound discretion of the court. Luhrs v. Brooklyn Heights R. R. Co., 11 App. Div. 173; S. C., 42 N. Y. Supp. 606. An examination of the record in the case at bar does not disclose such an abuse of this discretion as to warrant a reversal of the order made.

MacLeatt, J., concurs; Levbhtritt, J., taking no part.

Order affirmed, with costs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Ereedmatt, P. J.

After the rendition of a verdict in favor of the plaintiff herein, the trial judge, for reasons stated by him in his order, set aside the verdict as being against the weight of evidence and ordered a new trial. The question whether the verdict is against the weight of evidence is one the determination of which rests in the sound discretion of the court. Luhrs v. Brooklyn Heights R. R. Co., 11 App. Div. 173; S. C., 42 N. Y. Supp. 606. An examination of the record in the case at bar does not disclose such an abuse of this discretion as to warrant a reversal of the order made.

MacLeatt, J., concurs; Levbhtritt, J., taking no part.

Order affirmed, with costs.

Bauer v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co., 29 Misc. 636, 61 N.Y.S. 164 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1899).

Pincite

29 Misc. 636 (Bauer v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related