Gibson v. Lehde, (1937)
Court: Supreme Court of Florida
Number:
Visitors: 17
Judges: PER CURIAM.
Attorneys: Samuel Feinberg and Eldridge Cutts, for Plaintiff in Error.
Peyton T. Jordan and Altman Cooper, for Defendant in Error.
Filed: Jun. 28, 1937
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: The writ of error brings for review an order granting a new trial. The order granting new trial was as follows: "It is thereupon ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the plaintiff's motion for a new trial be and is hereby granted and the said verdict set aside, and the plaintiff is granted a new trial for the reasons, to-wit: "1. That the evidence does not sustain the verdict. "(a) There is no testimony to show that the plaintiff's attorney had express authority to make the agreement claimed by the defenda
Summary: The writ of error brings for review an order granting a new trial. The order granting new trial was as follows: "It is thereupon ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the plaintiff's motion for a new trial be and is hereby granted and the said verdict set aside, and the plaintiff is granted a new trial for the reasons, to-wit: "1. That the evidence does not sustain the verdict. "(a) There is no testimony to show that the plaintiff's attorney had express authority to make the agreement claimed by the defendan..
More
I agree that the third ground of the motion for a new trial was well taken so I concur in affirming the order setting aside the verdict on that ground. Further than this I am not prepared to go at this time.
Where a trial judge is impressed with the idea that inadmissible, or material but unimportant, evidence of a collateral character has been admitted and has unduly influenced a verdict for one party he may exercise a sound discretion to grant a new trial in order that the case may be retried under circumstances not leaving the basis for the jury's verdict in doubt as to the soundness of its foundation.
Source: CourtListener
