Mendell v. French

New York Court of Common Pleas

Mendell v. French

2 Hilt. 178

New York Court of Common Pleas·Decided December 15, 1858·Published

Opinion

Brady, J.

A perusal of the testimony in this case shows it to be conflicting. In such cases the finding cannot be disturbed, [179] unless the evidence against it so greatly preponderates as to warrant the inference of bias, corruption, or partiality, even although the court may be of opinion, as the evidence appears on paper, that they should have found differently. Mazetti v. The N.Y. & Harlem RR. Co., 3 E. D. Smith, 98.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Brady, J.

A perusal of the testimony in this case shows it to be conflicting. In such cases the finding cannot be disturbed, [179] unless the evidence against it so greatly preponderates as to warrant the inference of bias, corruption, or partiality, even although the court may be of opinion, as the evidence appears on paper, that they should have found differently. Mazetti v. The N.Y. & Harlem RR. Co., 3 E. D. Smith, 98.

Judgment affirmed.

Mendell v. French, 2 Hilt. 178 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1858).

Pincite

2 Hilt. 178 (Mendell v. French) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.