Marsella v. Simonelli

Superior Court of Rhode Island

Marsella v. Simonelli

2 Super. Ct. (R.I.) 82

Superior Court of Rhode Island·Decided July 31, 1919·No. No. 37993·Published

Opinion

DECISION

DORAN, J.

Eor that part of plaintiff’s elaim not represented by his checks, I do not think it clear that the evidence preponderates in favor of plaintiff. A verdict for plaintiff for the debt represented by the ehecks I should not disturb, but plaintiff testified to credits in defendant’s favor amounting to about $141. If interest is allowed on the ehecks from their dates, it is impossible with any accuracy to make rests for deduction of the credits. The plaintiff was a most difficult witness to understand. I have not data of sufficient certainty to attempt to make a remittitur.

Motion for new trial granted.

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

DECISION

DORAN, J.

Eor that part of plaintiff’s elaim not represented by his checks, I do not think it clear that the evidence preponderates in favor of plaintiff. A verdict for plaintiff for the debt represented by the ehecks I should not disturb, but plaintiff testified to credits in defendant’s favor amounting to about $141. If interest is allowed on the ehecks from their dates, it is impossible with any accuracy to make rests for deduction of the credits. The plaintiff was a most difficult witness to understand. I have not data of sufficient certainty to attempt to make a remittitur.

Motion for new trial granted.

Marsella v. Simonelli, 2 Super. Ct. (R.I.) 82 (R.I. Ct. App. 1919).

Pincite

2 Super. Ct. (R.I.) 82 (Marsella v. Simonelli) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.