Hoyt v. Saunders
C. W. HOYT v. R. H. W. SAUNDERS
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- William J. Murray, Jr. (author), Solomon Heydenfeldt
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 — Murray
The opinion of the Court was delivered by Mr. Oh. J. Murray.
Mr. J. Heydenfeldt concurred.
*348We are of opinion that the District Court should have granted a new trial in this case, on the ground of newly discovered evidence.
The report of the referee discloses some hesitation and doubt in arriving at the conclusions of fact, and his [348] supplemental *report shows that, if such newly discovered evidence had been adduced on the trial, the result, in all probability, would have been different. Under such circumstsnces, the ends of justice would be better preserved by a new trial.
Ordered accordingly.
Respondent petitioned for a rehearing, which was denied.