Legal Opinion · Dissent

Summerfield v. Pringle

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided December 15, 1943No. 7087Published

1Dissent

AILSHIE, J.,

(Dissenting). — It is an established rule in this court, that verdicts will not be disturbed where there is substantial evidence, though disputed, to support the verdict. This is upon the theory, that the jurors see and hear the witnesses testify and are in better position to determine their truthfulness and the weight to be given their evidence. It must be remembered, however, that seeing and hearing witnesses can not supply an absolute lack of evidence. Furthermore, in determining the sufficiency of the evidence to support a verdict, it is not enough to merely accept the…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Manion Ex Rel. Manion v. WaybrightIdaho Supreme Court · 1938
  2. Klam v. KoppelIdaho Supreme Court · 1941
  3. Lebak v. NelsonIdaho Supreme Court · 1940
  4. Day v. DayIdaho Supreme Court · 1906
  5. Hepp v. AderIdaho Supreme Court · 1942

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API