Aikin, Lambert & Co. v. Kirkland

No objectionis made to tbe instructions or any other ruling of the court, except the overruling of a motion for a new trial on the ground that it is contrary to the evidence. The evidence is conflicting. If the jury believed the witnesses for the plaintiffs, the verdict should have been for them. It is evident, however, they, did not do so, but based their verdict on the defendant’s evidence; and, as the court overruled the motion for a new trial, we cannot interfere..

Affirmed.