Berliner. v. Interurban Street Railway Co.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Berliner. v. Interurban Street Railway Co.

87 N.Y.S. 455

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York·Decided March 24, 1904·Published

Opinion

BLANCHARD, J.

The defendant asks a reversal of the judgment on the ground that the verdict of the jury was contrary to the weight of evidence. A reading of detached portions of the testimony may lead to that conclusion, but a careful reading of all the testimony discloses a conflict of evidence which was peculiarly for the jury to pass upon. The questions at issue were fairly presented to the jury in the charge of the court, and without exception, and I see no sufficient reason to reverse the judgment. .

The judgment and order denying the motion for a new trial must be affirmed, with costs. All concur.

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

BLANCHARD, J.

The defendant asks a reversal of the judgment on the ground that the verdict of the jury was contrary to the weight of evidence. A reading of detached portions of the testimony may lead to that conclusion, but a careful reading of all the testimony discloses a conflict of evidence which was peculiarly for the jury to pass upon. The questions at issue were fairly presented to the jury in the charge of the court, and without exception, and I see no sufficient reason to reverse the judgment. .

The judgment and order denying the motion for a new trial must be affirmed, with costs. All concur.

Berliner. v. Interurban Street Railway Co., 87 N.Y.S. 455 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1904).

Pincite

87 N.Y.S. 455 (Berliner. v. Interurban Street Railway Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.