
    GEORGE NORBERG v. OLE PEARSON AND ANOTHER.
    
    November 24, 1916.
    Nos. 20,075—(131).
    New trial.
    Neither the “surprise” of counsel nor newly discovered evidence justified a new trial in this case. [Reporter.]
    Action in the district court for Red Lake county to recover $20,000 damages caused by being ejected from defendants’ saloon. The case was tried before Watts, J., who when plaintiff rested denied defendants’ motion to dismiss the action, and a jury which returned a verdict tor $1,800. From an order denying their motion for a new trial, defendants appealed.
    Affirmed.
    P. J. Russell, for appellants.
    
      Jáoñtreville J. Brown, for respondent.
    
      
       Reported in 159 N. W. 1095.
    
   Pee Cubiam.

Action, for damages for negligence. The case was tried by a jury which found a verdict for the plaintiff. A motion was made for a new trial on the grounds of (a) surprise, and (b) newly discovered evidence. From a denial of the motion, defendants appeal.

An examination of the record satisfies us that this is not a case of “surprise” such as would justify a new trial. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to grant a new trial because of newly discovered evidence.

Order affirmed.

Brown, C. J., took no part.  