Taylor v. McKinley
H. W. TAYLOR v. JAMES McKINLEY, ALEXANDER GARRIOCH and G. W. MOWBRAY
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Heydeneeldt (author), William J. Murray, Jr.
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion — Heydeneeldt
Mr. Justice Heydeneeldt delivered the opinion of the Court.
Mr. Ch. J. Murray concurred.
This Court has always refused to interfere with the verdict of a jury, where the evidence is dubious or conflicting. Nor, in such case, will we revise the discretion of the Court below, in granting or refusing a new trial.
The assignments of error made in this case are too unsubstantial to require consideration or argument.
Let the judgment be affirmed, with ten per cent, damages.
Cited by
- Kellenberger v. Market Street Cable Railway Co. No. 15,020 · 1893-05-03