Hackett v. Shaw

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

Hackett v. Shaw

51 A. 1040, 24 R.I. 29, 1902 R.I. LEXIS 4

DecidedMarch 14, 1902

StatusPublished

This text of 51 A. 1040 (Hackett v. Shaw) 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

Hackett v. Shaw, 51 A. 1040, 24 R.I. 29, 1902 R.I. LEXIS 4 (R.I. 1902).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

(1) Oases in which new trials have been granted by this court for inadequacy of damages have been those where there was no question as to the extent of the injury. Gartner v. Saxon, 19 R. I. 461 ; McNeil v. Lyons, 20 R. I. 672. Where there has been a conflict of testimony as to the extent of the injury a new trial has been denied, because the court could not say that the verdict did not represent the *30 honest judgment of the jury upon the conflicting testimony, McGowan v. Interstate Co., 20 R. I. 264.

D. J. Holland, for plaintiff. E. D. Bassett, for defendant.

In this case there was conflicting testimony as to the extent of the injury, and the jury may have believed the testimony for the defence; and, if so, we cannot say that the verdict was clearly wrong.

Petition for new trial denied.

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

Per Curiam.

(1) Oases in which new trials have been granted by this court for inadequacy of damages have been those where there was no question as to the extent of the injury. Gartner v. Saxon, 19 R. I. 461 ; McNeil v. Lyons, 20 R. I. 672. Where there has been a conflict of testimony as to the extent of the injury a new trial has been denied, because the court could not say that the verdict did not represent the *30 honest judgment of the jury upon the conflicting testimony, McGowan v. Interstate Co., 20 R. I. 264.

D. J. Holland, for plaintiff. E. D. Bassett, for defendant.

In this case there was conflicting testimony as to the extent of the injury, and the jury may have believed the testimony for the defence; and, if so, we cannot say that the verdict was clearly wrong.

Petition for new trial denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

51 A. 1040, 24 R.I. 29, 1902 R.I. LEXIS 4, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hackett-v-shaw-ri-1902.