McKin v. Siegel
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
1Opinion of the CourtBraley, J.
It cannot be held as matter of law that the denial of the defendant’s motion for a directed verdict was erroneous. The bill of exceptions contains no statement that all the material evidence is before us. York v. Barstow, 175 Mass. 167. Cohen v. Longarini, 207 Mass. 556. The *270defendant’s exceptions to the refusal of the motion for a new trial also show no error of law. It was for the trial judge to determine in his discretion whether the verdict was against the evidence and the weight of the evidence, or whether the damages were excessive. The other grounds alleged, whether the verdict was…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Cohen v. LongariniMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1911
- York v. BarstowMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1900
- Sanger v. MilburyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1925
3Cited by13 opinions
- Commonwealth v. GricusMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1944
- Irving v. BonjornoMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1951
- Gurll v. Massasoit Greyhound Ass'nMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1949
- Schnepel v. KiddMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1954
- Handrahan v. North Main Street Garage, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1942
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.