...fraudulent misrepresentation or fraudulent concealment, a verdict having been found for the pursuer, a rule to show cause why a new trial should not be granted, on the ground of the verdict being contrary to evidence, discharged. Kirkpatrick v. Irvitie, 1850, 7 Bell 186 ; 22...

...excluding evidence, llerritt v. Hibtard. . . 368 3. NEW TRIAL — GKOUNDS — INSUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE. A new trial should not be granted on the ground that the verdict is contrary to the evidence merely because the court differed with many of the witnesses as to the extent...

...overruled.1 KENNEDY v. McKAY, REID AND HALLIARD. 1881. SUPREME COURT OF NEW JERSEY. 43 NJL 288. ON rule to show cause why a new trial should not be granted. BEASLEY, CJ — This is a suit bottomed on an alleged fraud committed by the defendants, in the sale...

...the judgment in the above case should not be arrested, is discharged; and, for the same reasons, the rule to show cause why a new trial should not be granted is discharged, and the said defendants. Steward Hettig. Richard Thomas, and John Moore, are directed...

...After this judgment of the court of appeals in the case of Samuel Friedman, as was inevitable, the rule to show cause why a new trial should not be granted in the ease of the infant plaintiff against the same defendant was made absolute by the trial court,...

...that such evidence was inadmissible, the plaintiff recovered a verdict. A rule having been obtained to show cause why a new trial should not be granted on this misdirection. Ld. Erskine for the plaintiff argued that, if there had been any particular description...

...motion for a new trial and obtained a rule to show cause why a new trial should not be granted. The rule to show cause why a new trial should not be granted was considered by the court in bane, all threeof the judges being present, and all concurred, after...

...Railway Co. т. Slattery (1878, 3 AC 1155) distinguished. II. Process— Jury trial— Rule to shew cause why a new trial should not be granted on the ground that the verdict was contrary to evidence -Jury Trials Amendment (Scotland) Act 1910 (10 Edw. УЛ. and l Geo. V. cap....

...to have been sold by the plaintiffs to the defendants. A verdict was rendered for the plaintiffs. A rule to show cause why a new trial should not be granted was allowed by the trial judge. REED, J.2 The main contention by the counsel of the defendants is,...

...jury found a verdict for the plaintiff, and assessed his damages at five hundred and fifty dollars. A rule to show cause why a new trial should not be granted, was allowed; and the following reasons were assigned for setting aside the verdict: 1. Because an action...