¶1Defendant moves for a new trial after a jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff for $145.
¶2On May 5, 1930, plaintiff was injured, while crossing Washington Street, by being struck by the defendant’s automobile.
¶3The plaintiff contended that he was crossing from the Biltmore Hotel side of Washington Street to the City Hall side along what would be the easterly sidewalk of Eddy Street if extended; that when he had almost reached the southerly sidewalk of Washington Street, he was struck.
¶4The defendant’s contention was that the accident happened nearly opposite the entrance to the City 'Hall on its north side some distance east of Eddy Street and that the plaintiff stepped out from behind a parked car.
¶5This is a case where the evidence was conflicting and just the type that should be given to a jury, to pass upon.
¶6The Court feels that the verdict as rendered is supported by the evidence and that the damages are not excessive. As to the other points raised by the defendant’s motion, nothing was offered at the hearing to substantiate them.
¶7Motion for new trial denied.