From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Walker v. Norton

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine. Waldo
Feb 23, 1932
159 A. 119 (Me. 1932)

Opinion

Opinion, February 23, 1932.

VERDICTS. JURY FINDINGS.

Whether, in a particular case, where the testimony is conflicting, liability has been shown, is generally a question to be determined by the jury. A verdict, which a preponderance of the evidence reasonably supports, is not disturbable on motion. But where, as in the case at bar, on the whole record, no weight of evidence, adequate to satisfy the minds of reasonable men, fairly tended to support the jury's finding, the verdict can not be allowed to stand.

On general motion for new trial by defendant. An action of assumpsit on an account annexed, for wages for personal services. Trial was had at the April Term, 1931, of the Superior Court for the County of Waldo. The jury rendered a verdict for the plaintiff in the sum of $581.13. A general motion for new trial was thereupon filed by the defendant. Motion sustained. Verdict set aside. New trial granted. The case sufficiently appears in the opinion.

Buzzell Thornton, for plaintiff.

Locke, Perkins Williamson, for defendant.

SITTING: PATTANGALL, C. J., DUNN, STURGIS, BARNES, FARRINGTON, THAXTER, JJ.


The defendant presents this case on motion for a new trial. The motion recites the usual grounds.

The action was assumpsit, to recover a balance alleged as due the plaintiff from the defendant, as wages for the personal services of the former, from April 15, 1928, to December 8, 1929, the latter date inclusive, at $32.00 per week. Credits aggregated $2,214.00.

The plea was the general issue.

The amount of the verdict was $581.13, apparently all plaintiff sued for, including interest from the date of the writ.

Whether, in a particular case, where the testimony is conflicting, liability has been shown, is generally a question to be determined by the jury. A verdict, which a preponderance of the evidence reasonably supports, is not disturbable on motion.

But where, as here, on the whole record, no weight of evidence, adequate to satisfy the minds of reasonable men, fairly tended to support the jury's finding, the verdict can not be allowed to stand.

Motion sustained. Verdict set aside. New trial granted.


Summaries of

Walker v. Norton

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine. Waldo
Feb 23, 1932
159 A. 119 (Me. 1932)
Case details for

Walker v. Norton

Case Details

Full title:DAVID E. WALKER vs. B. O. NORTON

Court:Supreme Judicial Court of Maine. Waldo

Date published: Feb 23, 1932

Citations

159 A. 119 (Me. 1932)
159 A. 119

Citing Cases

Poulin v. Bilodeau

It cannot be said that the verdict was contrary to the law which the presiding justice correctly and…

McCarthy v. Mason

The application of it is for the jury and its verdict must stand, unless "on the whole record" there is "no…