Legal Opinion

McPhillips v. Blomgren

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided March 1, 1966PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBeilfuss, J.

The plaintiff-appellant concedes that a trial court’s order for a new trial in the interests of justice will not be reversed unless there is a clear showing of abuse of discretion.

He does contend, however, that if the evidence was sufficient to support the jury’s findings the verdict should not be set aside nor a new trial granted. 1

This court has not so restricted the trial court in ruling upon a motion for a new trial in the interests of justice.

“It is well established that the supreme court will affirm a trial court’s order for a new trial in the interest of justice unless there is a clear…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Guptill v. RoemerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1955
  2. Post v. ThomasWisconsin Supreme Court · 1942
  3. Gross Common Carrier v. Quick-N-Clean Corp.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1965
  4. Brunke v. PoppWisconsin Supreme Court · 1963
  5. Grohusky v. FerryWisconsin Supreme Court · 1947

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Lutz v. Shelby Mutual InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1975
  2. State v. GeorgeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1975
  3. In Re Estate of HaeseWisconsin Supreme Court · 1977
  4. Steinhorst v. H. C. Prange Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1970
  5. Pruss v. StrubeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1968

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