Opinion
05-06-1886
WEAVER v. BLIVEN.
Ellis & Kerr, for the plaintiff in error. Whitehurst & Hughes and Sharp & Hughes, for the defendant in error.
Error to judgment of circuit court of Norfolk, rendered September 30th, 1884, in an action of trespass on the case in assumpsit, wherein Charles Bliven was plaintiff and Wm. R. Weaver was defendant. Verdict was for plaintiff for $1,783.86. Defendant moved for a new trial on the ground that the verdict was contrary to the law and evidence. The circuit court overruled the motion. Whereupon, the defendant excepted, and the court certified the evidence and gave judgment according to the verdict. The defendant obtained a writ of error and supersedeas.
Ellis & Kerr, for the plaintiff in error.
Whitehurst & Hughes and Sharp & Hughes, for the defendant in error.
OPINION
LACY, J.
It is well settled that this court cannot be called on to pass on the credibility of the witnesses, or the weight of the testimony, upon an application for a writ of error to the judgment of the court below in refusing to set aside a verdict of a jury.
The sole question here is one of fact. No demurrer was filed to the declaration; no instructions were asked by the plaintiff in error; no exceptions taken to the evidence on the ground of illegality, inadmissibility, irrelevancy, nor otherwise.
The only question brought before this court here is as to the judgment of the circuit court in refusing to set aside the verdict of the jury and grant to the defendant, the plaintiff in error here, a new trial.
The verdict in this case is not against the evidence, nor is it without evidence, but it sustains the verdict of the jury, and the circuit court did not err in its refusal to set the same aside and grant a new trial; and the said judgment is affirmed.
JUDGMENT AFFIRMED.