Ahlstrom v. Cummings
Alaska Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
DIMOND, Justice.
Appellants brought this action for personal injuries arising out of an automobile accident. A jury found for the appellees. Appellants contend that errors were committed in the court below which require that the case be remanded for a new trial.
Appellants’ main point is that the jury’s verdict was contrary to law and the weight of the evidence, and therefore the trial court erred in failing to grant a new trial.
The matter of granting or refusing a new trial rests in the sound discretion of the trial judge. We shall not interfere with the exercise of his discretion except in…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- ætna Casualty & Surety Co. v. YeattsCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1941
- Veal v. Newlin, Inc.Alaska Supreme Court · 1961
- Thomson v. Wheeler Construction CompanyAlaska Supreme Court · 1963
- Rank v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1962
- Miller v. Pennsylvania Railroad Co.District Court, District of Columbia · 1958
3Cited by65 opinions
- Holiday Inns of America, Inc. v. PeckAlaska Supreme Court · 1974
- Poulin v. ZartmanAlaska Supreme Court · 1975
- City of Whittier v. Whittier Fuel & Marine Corp.Alaska Supreme Court · 1978
- Fruit v. SchreinerAlaska Supreme Court · 1972
- Hayes v. Xerox Corp.Alaska Supreme Court · 1986
60 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.