Darnell v. Krouse
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania
At Law. On motion for new trial.
1Opinion of the Court
J. B. McPHERSON, District Judge.
Very little of the testimony that was taken in support of these motions is properly to be described as after discovered evidence, and for that reason most of it must be disregarded altogether. The jury has settled finally the question of liability for the injuries suffered by the respective plaintiffs, and the conflicting testimony was of such a character that I should not be justified in disturbing the verdict, so far as that point is concerned. But there is another point about which I feel more freedom, namely, the size of the verdict in favor of Mrs.…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Rice v. Union Pacific R. Co.District Court, D. Nebraska · 1949
- Podgorski v. KerwinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1920