Walstonv.Greene

Supreme Court of North CarolinaSep 1, 1957
99 S.E.2d 805 (N.C. 1957)

Cases citing this case

  • Sizemore v. Raxter

    That justice would be served thereby was, when Rule 59 was adopted, a recognized ground for granting a new…

  • Jackson v. Culbreth

    N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 59(a)(8)-(9) (2007). Under prior case law, our Supreme Court has approved a new…

19 Citing Cases

Summaries written by judges

  • affirming grant of new trial where trial judge set aside verdict because "justice and equity" required him to do so

    Summary of this case from Chandler v. U-Line Corp.

1 Summary

Filed 18 September, 1957.

Trial 52 — The action of the trial court in setting aside the verdict in its discretion upon its opinion that equity and justice so required is not subject to review on appeal in the absence of abuse of discretion.

APPEAL by defendant from Parker, J., February Term, 1957, of PASQUOTANK.

Forrest V. Dunstan and Frank B. Aycock, Jr., for plaintiff, appellee.

LeRoy Goodwin for defendant, appellant.


Administrator's action to recover damages for wrongful death. Plaintiff's intestate, a six year old boy, was killed when struck by an automobile operated by defendant.

Issues of negligence, contributory negligence and damages, raised by the pleadings, were submitted. The jury answered the first (negligence) issue, "No." Whereupon, plaintiff moved to set aside the verdict. The court allowed said motion; and, "IN THE DISCRETION OF THE COURT," it was "ORDERED, CONSIDERED AND DECREED that the VERDICT be, and it is hereby SET ASIDE, and that this action be reinstated upon the civil issue docket of Pasquotank County for disposition at some future term of Court."

Defendant excepted to said order and appealed. The only assignment of error is based on this exception.


Whether a verdict should be set aside, otherwise than for error of law, rests in the sound discretion of the trial judge. Here the trial judge, "being of the opinion that justice and equity" required that he do so, exercised such discretion and set the verdict aside. The record discloses no abuse of discretion; hence, the order is not subject to review on appeal. Brink v. Black, 74 N.C. 329; Bird v. Bradburn, 131 N.C. 488, 42 S.E. 936; Goodman v. Goodman, 201 N.C. 808, 161 S.E. 686; In re Blair, 230 N.C. 753, 55 S.E.2d 504; Williams v. Stumpf, 243 N.C. 434, 90 S.E.2d 688.

The appeal is without substance, and will be dismissed. Goodman v. Goodman, supra.

Appeal dismissed.