LaFontaine v. Mitchell

2 Citing cases

  1. Scanlon-Thompson Coal Co. v. Lick Branch Coal Co.

    47 S.W.2d 1007 (Ky. Ct. App. 1932)   Cited 5 times

    Mere preponderance of evidence or majority of witnesses favoring appellant is not sufficient to warrant this court in disturbing the verdict of a properly instructed jury. Kentucky Traction Terminal Co. v. Rodman's Guardian, 232 Ky. 285, 23 S.W.2d 272; La Fontaine v. Mitchell, 215 Ky. 184, 284 S.W. 1022. We find no merit in the contention that the court erred in not peremptorily instructing the jury to find for appellant because there was not sufficient proof of the open account sued upon.

  2. Kentucky Traction Terminal v. Roman's Guardian

    23 S.W.2d 272 (Ky. Ct. App. 1929)   Cited 29 times
    Trifling burn

    The established rule of this court is that a verdict of a properly instructed jury will not be disturbed, unless clearly and palpably against the evidence. C., N. O. T. P. R. Co. v. Wheeldon, 208 Ky. 201, 270 S.W. 762; La Fontaine v. Mitchell, 215 Ky. 184, 284 S.W. 1022. A mere preponderance of the evidence is not sufficient to warrant this court in overturning the verdict of a jury. Unless the verdict is flagrantly against the evidence, this court will not invade the province of the jury and set it aside.