Rogers v. Bowerman

21 F. 284, 22 Blatchf. 462, 1884 U.S. App. LEXIS 2373
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York·Decided August 22, 1884·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Wallace, J.

The plaintiffs ask leave to remit part of the amount for which the verdict in this case, by direction of the court, was rendered in their favor. The result, if such a reduction of the judgment to be entered is permitted, would be to reduce the judgment below the sum of $5,000, and thereby preclude the defendants from a review by writ of error to the supreme court. Undoubtedly, it is competent for the trial court, in the exercise of judicial discretion, to allow such a reduction to be made; but such a discretion should be very carefully and sparingly exercised. Certainly, this is not a case where the court should willingly deprive the defendants of an opportunity to review the decision. As is said in Thompson v. Butler, 95 U. S. 694, 696, “if the object of the reduction is to deprive an appellate court of jurisdiction in a meritorious case, it is to be presumed the trial court will not allow it to be done.” It is far from clear that the plaintiffs were entitled to recover, and a verdict was directed for them with grave doubt as to the correctness of the conclusions reached by the court. It is a peculiarly meritorious case for the consideration of the appellate court.

The motion of the plaintiffs is denied.

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

Rogers v. Bowerman, 21 F. 284, 22 Blatchf. 462, 1884 U.S. App. LEXIS 2373 (circtsdny 1884).

21 F. 284 (Rogers v. Bowerman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Stuart v. City of St. Paul
63 F. 644 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Minnesota, 1894)