Duke v. St. Louis & S. F. R.
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Arkansas
Action by Mrs. Clyde Duke, administratrix, etc., against the St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad Company to recover damages for the death of her husband. Plaintiff had judgment for $17,545, and defendant moved for a new trial. Motion granted unless plaintiff file a remittittr of her recovery above $6,000.
1Opinion of the Court
ROGERS, District Judge.
This is a motion for a new trial. I shall notice only two grounds of the motion, to the effect that the verdict was not warranted by the evidence, was excessive, and appeared to have Been given under prejudice and passion. It is necessary to refer to the practice in the federal courts in relation to motions for new trial before addressing myself to that question.
*686In Fishburn v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Ry., 137 U. S. 61, 62, 11 Sup. Ct. 8, 34 L. Ed. 585, Chief Justice Fuller said:
“In regard to motions for new trial and bills of exceptions, courts of the United…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Indianapolis & St. Louis Railroad v. HorstSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
- Vicksburg & Meridian Railroad v. PutnamSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Kennon v. GilmerSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. WardSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- New York, Lake Erie & Western Railroad v. Winter's AdministratorSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Murphy v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, ETC.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1944
- Cudahy Packing Co. v. City of OmahaCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1928
- Rice v. Union Pacific R. Co.District Court, D. Nebraska · 1949
- Harrison v. MurphySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912