
    The Orchard Place Land Company v. S. M. Lewis.
    Conedioting Evidencie — Granting New Trial — Review. Where the testimony at the trial is conflicting, and the trial court sets aside the verdict of the jury and grants a new trial, this court will not undertake to weigh the evidence, but will affirm the, order of the lower court.
    
      Error from Wyandotte Eistriot Court.
    
    ActioN by S. M. Lewis against the Orchard Place Land Company and another. July 7, 1890, a verdict in favor of said company was set aside, and a new trial granted, and said company brings error.
    
      Mills, Smith & Hobbs, for plaintiff in error.
    
      True & True, for defendant in error.
   The opinion of the court was delivered by

Allen, J.:

This case grew out of the same overflow of Splitlog creek as the cases of Kansas City v. Brady, 52 Kas. 297, and Kansas City v. Slangstrom, ante, p. 431. In this case, the jury rendered a verdict against the city of Kansas City only. The special findings of fact are very different from the findings in the other cases named. The court, on the application of the plaintiff, set aside the verdict in favor of the Orchard Place Land Company, and granted a new trial. Where the trial court sets aside a verdict based on conflicting evidence, and grants a new trial, the ord^r will not be disturbed by this court. (McCreary v. Hart, 39 Kas. 216; Black v. Berry, 40 id. 489.)

The order of the court granting a new trial is affirmed.

All the Justices concurring.  