Werner v. Schroeder
This text of 37 N.W. 449 (Werner v. Schroeder) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Minnesota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The reasons which led the trial court to grant a new trial are not disclosed. The order should be affirmed, if it was justified upon any ground suggested by the record. It is fair to presume, from the case before us, that a new trial was allowed because, in the opinion of the trial judge, the evidence did not justify the verdict. The rule regulating the action of this court upon appeal, in such cases, has been stated in Hicks v. Stone, 13 Minn. 398, (434,) [322]*322and reaffirmed and followed in numerous subsequent eases. The preponderance of the evidence in the case before us was not manifestly in favor of the verdict, and the order granting a new trial will be affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
37 N.W. 449, 38 Minn. 321, 1888 Minn. LEXIS 381, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/werner-v-schroeder-minn-1888.