
    Lizzie I. Crosby vs. St. Paul City Railway Company.
    January 12, 1886.
    Order granting New Trial — Discretion of Court. — Held, in conformity with the rule laid down and followed in numerous decisions of this court, that the order granting a new trial in this action, on the ground that the verdict was not justified by the evidence, was within the discretion of the trial court, and should not be disturbed on appeal.
    Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Bam-sey county, Brill, J., presiding, granting a new trial.
    
      H. J. Horn, for appellant.
    
      S. P. Crosby, for respondent.
   Vanderburgh, J.

This action was brought to recover damages for personal injuries alleged to have been suffered by plaintiff through the negligence of defendant in the management of one of its -cars upon which plaintiff was a passenger, and while she was in the act of alighting therefrom. The issues were tried before a jury, and submitted to them upon the testimony introduced in behalf of the respective parties. A new trial was granted by the court, on the ground that the verdict was not justified by the evidence.

It is not important to review the testimony in detail. It is sufficient to say that we have carefully considered it after argument by counsel, and are of the opinion that a new trial on this ground was fairly within the discretion of the trial court, under the rule governing such cases, as laid down and followed in numerous decisions in this court. Hicks v. Stone, 13 Minn. 398, (434;) Rheiner v. Stillwater Street Ry. Co., 29 Minn. 147; Fox v. Burke, 29 Minn. 171; Pratt v. Pioneer Press Co., 30 Minn. 41; Wilcox v. Landberg, 30 Minn. 93; Young v. Davis, 30 Minn. 293; Carlson v. Small, 32 Minn. 439; Clapp v. Minn, & St. L. Ry. Co., 33 Minn. 22.

Order affirmed.  