Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

89 Neb. 839

Pritchett v. Collins

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided September 25, 1911

Nebraska Supreme Court · decided 1911-09-25

<p>Appeal: Conflicting Evidence. In an action at law all questions of fact, depending upon conflicting evidence, are for the jury; and, unless manifestly wrong, the verdict should not be disturbed on appeal.</p>

Affirmed · Decided 1911-09-25

Fawcett, J.

¶1Action for rent of a.building. Counter-claim, for damages caused by a leaky roof. Verdict and judgment for defendants. Plaintiff appeals.

¶2The only error assigned and argued in plaintiff’s brief is the insufficiency of the evidence. Plaintiff concedes that there is a conflict in the oral testimony given by himself and the defendant Collins, but insists that his testimony is so strongly corroborated by undisputed facts that it should be believed as against “the story told by Collins.” This argument should have been, and doubtless was, addressed to the jury. While we might have arrived at a different cc/iclusion from that reached by the jury, had we been sitting as triers of fact, we cannot say that the verdict is manifestly wrong. In such case we should not interfere.

¶3Affirmed.

Sedgwick, J., not sitting.
/89/neb/839 · .json · Public domain