Dillon v. Hawkins
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Poinsett Circuit Court, First District; R. II. Dudley, Judge; 1. The verdict is so excessive as to show it was the result of passion, prejudice, recklessness or mistake. 9 Ark. 405; 25 Id. 49; 26 Id. 309; 39 Id. 5ll; 21 S. W. 36; 92 Ark. 345; 102 Id. 603. 2. It was error to give instruction No. 1, stating that the evidence was undisputed, etc. 93 Ark. 277. 3. The court erred in overruling the motion for new trial.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Poinsett Circuit Court, First District; R. II. Dudley, Judge; 1. The verdict is so excessive as to show it was the result of passion, prejudice, recklessness or mistake. 9 Ark. 405; 25 Id. 49; 26 Id. 309; 39 Id. 5ll; 21 S. W. 36; 92 Ark. 345; 102 Id. 603. 2. It was error to give instruction No. 1, stating that the evidence was undisputed, etc. 93 Ark. 277. 3. The court erred in overruling the motion for new trial. The evidence on behalf of Dillon on the motion was not disputed by Seeley. A complete defense was offered and not denied. The trial court having found that the verdict…
1OpinionWood, J.
(on rehearing). A petition for rehearing has been filed, in which counsel insist that the testimony offered in support of the motion for a new trial was such that this court should hold that the court below abused its discretion in refusing to grant the prayer for a new trial. It is conceded that the testimony offered at the trial before the jury, and which was heard and 'passed upon by the jury, is legally sufficient to support the -verdict returned. But it is insisted that a showing was made upon which this court should find that the court below abused its discretion in refusing* to grant…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Patrick v. WhitelySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
- American Bonding Co. v. MorrisSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1912
- McMurray v. BoydSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1894
- S. R. Morgan & Co. v. PaceSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1920