Brush

Brush v. Pacific Electric Railway Co.

Good Law
1922 Cal. App. LEXIS 258·58 Cal. App. 501·208 P. 997
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 11, 1922Civ. No. 3859.California2,743 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Finlayson, J.

This is an appeal from an order granting a new trial in an action for damages alleged to have been sustained by plaintiff through the negligence of defendant. The answer pleads contributory negligence. A verdict for fifteen thousand five hundred dollars in favor of plaintiff was returned by the jury, and judgment was entered accordingly. Thereafter defendant gave notice of its intention to move for a new trial on the ground, among others, that the evidence is insufficient to support the verdict. In due time defendant presented its motion; the motion was granted and a new trial ordered; and plaintiff now appeals from the order.

Bespondent, claiming that the record shows that the new trial was ordered on the ground of the insufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict, in that it appears from the preponderance of the evidence that the plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence, contends that the order must be affirmed unless it shall be made to appear that the lower court, in granting the new trial, committed a mani-' fest abuse of its discretion.

The record on appeal contains copies of two minute entries of the order granting a new trial, made, respectively, on March…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.