Comfort v. Thompson
10 Johns. 101
Opinion
The verdict is, no doubt, clearly against evidence ; hut this being an action for a penalty, there is no new trial granted, in such cases, on the ground of the verdict being contrary to evidence, provided the verdict be for the defendant, and there be no irregularity in the case. (2 Stra. 899. 1238.) There is, at least, as strong reason for applying this rule to such trials in justices’ courts, as in any other.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Comfort v. Thompson, 10 Johns. 101 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1813).
10 Johns. 101 (Comfort v. Thompson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Decker v. Stauring
57 How. Pr. 495 (New York Supreme Court, 1879)
United States v. One Hundred & Seventeen Packages of Plug Tobacco
27 F. Cas. 277 (S.D. New York, 1879)
People v. Townsend
37 Barb. 520 (New York Supreme Court, 1862)
Wheeler v. Calkins
17 How. Pr. 451 (New York Supreme Court, 1859)
Baker v. Richardson
1 Cow. 77 (New York Supreme Court, 1823)