Booth v. J. I. Case & Co.

Texas Commission of Appeals

Booth v. J. I. Case & Co.

1 White & W. 577

CourtTexas Commission of Appeals

DecidedMarch 9, 1881

DocketNo. 1515, Op. Book No. 2, p. 253

StatusPublished

This text of 1 White & W. 577 (Booth v. J. I. Case & Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Commission of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Booth v. J. I. Case & Co., 1 White & W. 577 (Tex. Super. Ct. 1881).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Watts, J.

§ 1029. Verdict against evidence; neiv trial. In cases of conflicting evidence or the impeachment of witnesses, it is the peculiar duty and special province of the jury to determine the credibility of the witnesses and the weight to be given to the testimony of each witness, and the determination of the jury in such cases will rarely, if ever, be revised by an appellate court. If the verdict is sustained by the evidence, it will not be set aside because the court might or would have come to a different conclusion. In this case the defendants, who were sued upon a note given for a machine, pleaded a failure of consideration, — that the machine was worthless, etc. The testimony of five or six unimpeached and uncontradicted witnesses concurred in support of the defendants’ plea, but the jury found for the plaintiff. Held, that the verdict wras contrary to the evidence; that the jury were not warranted in arbitrarily disregarding the testimony •of these wdtnesses, and that a new trial should have been granted the defendants.

Reversed and remanded.

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

Opinion by

Watts, J.

§ 1029. Verdict against evidence; neiv trial. In cases of conflicting evidence or the impeachment of witnesses, it is the peculiar duty and special province of the jury to determine the credibility of the witnesses and the weight to be given to the testimony of each witness, and the determination of the jury in such cases will rarely, if ever, be revised by an appellate court. If the verdict is sustained by the evidence, it will not be set aside because the court might or would have come to a different conclusion. In this case the defendants, who were sued upon a note given for a machine, pleaded a failure of consideration, — that the machine was worthless, etc. The testimony of five or six unimpeached and uncontradicted witnesses concurred in support of the defendants’ plea, but the jury found for the plaintiff. Held, that the verdict wras contrary to the evidence; that the jury were not warranted in arbitrarily disregarding the testimony •of these wdtnesses, and that a new trial should have been granted the defendants.

Reversed and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 White & W. 577, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/booth-v-j-i-case-co-texcommnapp-1881.