Skip to main content
· 5/13/1889

Kennon v. Gilmer

Citations

  • 131 U.S. 22
  • 9 S. Ct. 696
  • 33 L. Ed. 110
  • 1889 U.S. LEXIS 1795

Syllabus

<p>The denial of a change of venue, moved for on the affidavit of the party’s agent to the state of public opinion in the county in which the action is brought, is not reviewable by this court on error to the Supreme Court of a Territory, even if a subject of appeal to that court from the trial court under the territorial statutes.</p> <p>In an action against the proprietors of a stage coach, for an injury caused to a passenger by the misbehavior of one of the horses, evidence of subsequent similar misbehavior of the horse is admissible, in connection, with evidence of his misbehavior at and before.the time of the accident, as tending to prove a vicious disposition and fixed habit.</p> <p>In assessing damages for a personal injury caused by negligence, the jury may rightly be instructed to take into consideration the plaintiffs bodily and mental páin and suffering, taken together, and necessarily resulting from the original injury.</p> <p>In an action at law for a personal injury, in which damages have been assessed by a jury at an entire sum, the court is not authorized, upon a motion for a new triabfor excessive damages and for insufficiency of the evidence to justify the verdict, to enter an absolute judgment, according to its own estimate of the damages which the plaintiff ought to have recovered, for a less sum than assessed by the jury; and either party is entitled to a reversal of such a judgment by writ of error.</p>

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • explaining that plaintiff should have been given right of remittitur and that if he did not remit, \there should be a new trial of the whole case\
  • noting that “plaintiff wa,s prejudiced, because he was deprived of the election to take a new trial upon the whole case”
  • explaining that plaintiff should have been given right of re-mittitur and that if he did not remit, “there should be a new trial of the whole case”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Gray

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.