Strout v. Stewart
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Assumpsit. Motion for a new trial by tbe plaintiff, upon tbe ground tbat tbe verdict against bim, rendered at tbe April term, 1874, of tbe superior court for Cumberland county, was contrary to tbe law, and the evidence, and the weight of tbe evidence.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit. Motion for a new trial by tbe plaintiff, upon tbe ground tbat tbe verdict against bim, rendered at tbe April term, 1874, of tbe superior court for Cumberland county, was contrary to tbe law, and the evidence, and the weight of tbe evidence. At the May term, 1874, of tbat court tbe plaintiff filed another motion to set aside the verdict on account of newly discovered evidence relative to the matters at issue between these parties. . In September, 1869, there was a suit entered in the superior court in favor of J. B. Mathews and others against Donald M. Stewart, in the defence of…
1Opinion of the CourtDickerson, J.
Though the verdict in this case is against the weight of the evidence, it is not so manifestly wrong as to require ■ the court to set it aside for that cause alone.
The newly discovered evidence is material and not cumulative, consisting mainly of the admissions of the defendant. As this evidence was not known to the plaintiff at the time of the trial, and could not have been discovered by him by the exercise of due diligence, and, as it is obvious, that, if introduced, it would have reversed the verdict, the motion for a new trial on account of newly discovered eviden ce is sustained, and a…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Guth v. BellSupreme Court of Iowa · 1911
- City of Indianapolis v. TanselIndiana Supreme Court · 1901
- Cole v. Fall Brook Coal Co.New York Supreme Court · 1891