Walton v. Maguire
WALTON v. MAGUIRE
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Cope (author)
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 — Cope
Cope, J. delivered the opinion of the Court Baldwin, J. concurring.
The question in this case relates to the propriety of an order refusing a new trial, and the ground chiefly relied upon for a reversal is the insufficiency of the evidence to justify the decision. In making the order, the Court acted in the exercise of a sound legal discretion, and upon the evidence embodied in the record we cannot undertake to say that this discretion ivas abused. Our interference, under the circumstances, would be a departure from the rule upon which we have always acted in such cases.
There is nothing in the other point made; and the judgment is therefore affirmed.
Cited by
- Kellenberger v. Market Street Cable Railway Co. No. 15,020 · 1893-05-03
- Hall v. The Bark "Emily Banning" · 1867-10-15