
    N. A. Carlson vs. Hiram Small.
    November 29, 1884.
    Verdict against Evidence — New Trial — -Discretion of Trial Court.— Hule in Hicks v. Stone, 13 Minn. 398, (434,) and liheiner v. Stillwater Street By. Co., 29 Minn. 147, as to reviewing an order of the trial court granting a new trial because the verdict is against the evidence, followed.
    This action was commenced before a justice of the peace in Redwood county, to recover possession of a carload of wood of the value of $40, and judgment was rendered for defendant. Plaintiff appealed to the district court, where the action was tried before Webber, J., and a jury, and defendant had a verdict. Defendant appeals from an order granting a new trial.
    
      M. M. Madignn, for appellant.
    
      Redding é Laing, for respondent.
   Gilfillan, C. J.

It is apparent from the record, and seems to be assumed in the argument here, that the court below granted the new trial because, in its opinion, the verdict was not sustained by the evidence. Although we think the court might have denied the motion, the evidence certainly was not in favor of the verdict to that extent that we could, within the rule laid down in Hicks v. Stone, 13 Minn. 398, (434,) and followed in Rheiner v. Stillwater Street Ry. Co., 29 Minn. 147, interfere with the order of the trial court granting a new trial.

Order affirmed.  