¶1Granting or denying a motion for a new trial made upon a settled statement of the case, which shows that there was a conflict or preponderance of evidence upon an issue of fact involved in the case, is a matter within the sound discretion of the trial Court, or its successor, which the appellate Court will not revise, except in a case in which there has been an abuse of discretion. The case in hand is not an exceptional one, and I, therefore, agree that the order appealed from be affirmed.
58 Cal. 306
Irving v. Cunningham
Decided July 1, 1881
California Supreme Court · decided 1881-07-01
<p>Appeal from an order granting the plaintiff a new trial in the Superior Court of Alameda County. Crane, J.</p> <p>Petition for hearing in Bank was filed in this case after judgment, and denied.</p>
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1881-07-01
How this case has been cited
Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently November 1930
13 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
View the full empirical analysis of this case →