Order Granting New Trial—Appeal—Review not Limited to Grounds Stated.—In reviewing an order granting a new trial, the appellate court is not limited to the grounds expressly stated in the order, but may consider and determine any ground specified in the notice of intention, except that the ground for insufficiency of evidence cannot be reviewed, when the evidence is substantially conflicting.

Id.—Order Granted for Insufficiency of Evidence—Support of Verdict for Moving Party—Change of Judge Immaterial.— Where the order was granted for insufficiency of the evidence; and sufficient evidence appears to support a verdict for the moving party, notwithstanding conflicting evidence to the contrary, this court cannot interfere with the order; and the fact that the order was made by a judge other than the one who tried the ease, is immaterial, and cannot extend, the power of this court to interfere therewith.

Trover—Conversion of Lumber—Fraud in Procuring Sale—Transfer without Value—Notice—Avoidance of Title—Pleading— Evidence.—In an action of trover for the conversion of lumber, when the complaint contains the usual averments, and the defendant denies plaintiff’s ownership and the conversion, the plaintiff, without pleading that the property was acquired by a third party by fraud in procuring the sale thereof from plaintiff, and was transferred by him to the defendant without consideration, and with notice of the fraud, may prove these facts in avoidance of the title, as between the original parties, and as against the defendant, where the action was promptly brought.

Td.—Effect of Fraud in Sale—Title fob Certain Purposes—Election—Defrauded Party.—The fraudulent sale passed the title sufficiently to protect a bona fide purchaser without notice of the fraud, and sufficiently to be confirmed in case of such long acquiescence and unreasonable delay by the party defrauded as to suggest the inference of his consent; though by prompt action of the vendor, upon discovery of the fraud he may elect to treat the sale as void, both as against the original purchaser, and as against a fraudulent vendee with notice.

Id.—Election of Remedies by Defrauded Party.—The defrauded party may elect between the civil remedies of trover, replevin in the eepit, replevin in the detinet, or trespass.

Id.—Fraud not a Part of Cause of Action—Order of Proof.—The cause of action, in the remedy shown, does not rest upon fraud. The fraud comes in technically not as a part of the plaintiff’s prima facie case, hut by way of reply to any claim of the defendant resting upon the sale; yet this is a mere matter of order of proof.

Id.—Sufficiency of Proof of Fraud — Presumption — Conflicting Evidence.—The presumption of law is in favor of honesty and fair dealing, where there are no confidential relations; and the evidence of fraud must he more than sufficient to raise a suspicion. It is held that the evidence on the question of fraud was such as to make the decision of the trial court in the matter conclusive upon this court.