 | Arkansas. Supreme Court - 1841 - 662 str.
...the evidence. Thomison they found not guilty. The defendants Ballard, Mitchell, and Hill, then moved for a new trial, on the grounds that the verdict was contrary to evidence; that the court refused to permit the jury first to find as to Thomisou ; that the finding... | |
 | Arkansas. Supreme Court - 1877 - 810 str.
...order was contrary to law, they will acquit." The jury rendered a verdict of acquittal, the State moved for a new trial, on the' grounds that the verdict was contrary to law and evidence, and the court erred in giving the third instruction asked for defendant. The motion was... | |
 | Arkansas. Supreme Court - 1853 - 884 str.
...R. 325. After the case was remanded, there was a trial, and verdict for plaintiff. Defendant moved for a new trial on the grounds, that the verdict was contrary to law and evidence, and that the court erred in refusing instructions moved by defendants, and in giving... | |
 | Arkansas. Supreme Court - 1858 - 764 str.
...his punishment assessed by the jury at one hour's imprisonment, and a fine of fifty dollars. He moved for a new trial on the grounds that the verdict was contrary to law and evidence, etc.; the Court overruled the motion, he excepted, set out the evidence, and appealed.... | |
 | Arkansas. Supreme Court - 1851 - 860 str.
...plaintiffs, and judgment rendered against defendant and his security in the appeal. Defendant filed a motion for a new trial, on the grounds that the verdict was contrary to law and evidence, which was overruled. Pending the trial he took a bill of exceptions to decisions of the... | |
 | Arkansas. Supreme Court - 1853 - 926 str.
...Mitchell) severed, was tried on the plea of not guilty, convicted, and fined one hundred dollars. He moved for a new trial, on the grounds that the verdict was contrary to the evidence, the law, and the instructions of the court. The court overruled the motion, and Mitchell... | |
 | Arkansas. Supreme Court - 1859 - 738 str.
...prove the contract as alleged. The jury found a verdict in favor of the plaintiff; the defendant moved for a new trial on the grounds that the verdict was contrary to evidence and the charge of the Court; the motion was overruled, and the defendant appealed. It is insisted... | |
 | Arkansas. Supreme Court - 1846 - 628 str.
...follows a similar statement, dated 30th June, 1843. , On the first day of July, the plaintiff moved for a new trial, on the grounds that the verdict was contrary to evidence — verdict and judgnwnt contrary to law — and that improper evidence was intro* Thorn M.... | |
 | Georgia. Supreme Court - 1882 - 874 str.
...spirituous liquors without license. On the trial of the case the jury, under the charge of the court, found the defendant guilty. A motion was made for a new trial on the grounds therein stated, which was overruled, and the defendant excepted. It appears from the evidence in the... | |
 | Georgia. Supreme Court - 1889 - 950 str.
...and to support the evidence for the State already in. After verdict of guilty, the defendant moved for a new trial on the grounds that the verdict was contrary to law and evidence; because of the admission of the testimony of Eubanks after the evidence for both sides... | |
| |
Respondent moved for a new trial on the grounds that the verdict was contrary to the weight of the evidence, that it was a compromise verdict, and that the damages allowed were inadequate. 
