Eddy v. Wilkinson

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

Eddy v. Wilkinson

18 A. 202, 16 R.I. 557, 1889 R.I. LEXIS 66

DecidedJuly 6, 1889

StatusPublished

This text of 18 A. 202 (Eddy v. Wilkinson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Rhode Island primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Eddy v. Wilkinson, 18 A. 202, 16 R.I. 557, 1889 R.I. LEXIS 66 (R.I. 1889).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

In this case, on trial in the Court of Common Pleas, exceptions were taken to the rulings of the court, and the case was brought here upon a bill of exceptions, so that it is no longer pending in the Court of Common Pleas. The judgment of that court has been affirmed in this court. The petition for a new trial, if maintainable, must be at least amended before it can be applied to the present state of the case. The more proper procedure where a party wishes for a new trial, both on account of alleged erroneous rulings and because the verdict is against the evidence, is for him to petition, simply alleging the erroneous rulings as one ground, and that the verdict is against *558 the evidence, accompanying the allegation with a report of the evidence, as another ground. Elliott v. Benedict, 13 R. I. 463.

Charles H. Page Eranklin P. Owen, for plaintiff. Charles A. Wilson, Thomas A. Jenekes ¿f Samuel S. Stone, for defendant.

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

Per Curiam.

In this case, on trial in the Court of Common Pleas, exceptions were taken to the rulings of the court, and the case was brought here upon a bill of exceptions, so that it is no longer pending in the Court of Common Pleas. The judgment of that court has been affirmed in this court. The petition for a new trial, if maintainable, must be at least amended before it can be applied to the present state of the case. The more proper procedure where a party wishes for a new trial, both on account of alleged erroneous rulings and because the verdict is against the evidence, is for him to petition, simply alleging the erroneous rulings as one ground, and that the verdict is against *558 the evidence, accompanying the allegation with a report of the evidence, as another ground. Elliott v. Benedict, 13 R. I. 463.

Charles H. Page Eranklin P. Owen, for plaintiff. Charles A. Wilson, Thomas A. Jenekes ¿f Samuel S. Stone, for defendant.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

18 A. 202, 16 R.I. 557, 1889 R.I. LEXIS 66, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/eddy-v-wilkinson-ri-1889.