Montgomery Ward v. Thomas

NESBETT, Chief Justice.

• The sole question presented by this appeal is whether the denial of appellant’s motion for a new trial was an abuse of discretion.

At the outset it should be understood that the policy of this court as stated in Ahlstrom v. Cummings 1 is that the granting or refusal of a request for a new trial rests in the sound discretion of the trial judge. This court will not overrule the trial judge in the exercise of his discretion except in exceptional circumstances and to prevent a miscarriage of justice.

The same general rule is applicable though the motion for new trial is…