Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 6.djvu/140

 128 fkdebaIj bepobteb. �will be evidence. And we are f urther of opinion, that the stat- ute power to file interrogatories, excepting for the production of books and papers, may be used instead of a bill of discov- ery. Section 861 of the Eevised Statutes, declaring that the mode of proof in actions at common law shall be by oral testimony, does not appear to us to refpr to discovery, whether by bill or interrogatory. Motion granted. ���FuLLEB, Trustee, v. Fletchbb and othera. �{Circuit Court, D. Rhode laland, March 2, 1881.) �1. Naw Teial — Verdict Conteaby to thb WEianT of thb Evi- �DBNCB. �A motion for a new trial will not be granted upon the ground that the verdict was contrary to the weight of the evidence, unless it clearly appears that the jury must have fallen into some important mistake, or must have departed from some rule of law, or must have made deductions from the evidence which were plainly not warranted by it. �2. Bamb — Samb. �Therefore, where the verdict was, in substance, "We flnd for the defendant upon the general issue, and give no consideration to the special pleas," it was hdd that a motion for 'a new trial ehould be granted, where it was shown that the verdict was not war- ranted upon the evidence under the general issue, although it could have been sustained if the verdict had been simply for the defend- ant, without any mention of the special pleas. — [Ed. �Motion for New Trial. �Richard B. Comstoek and Elisha C. Mowry, for plaintif?. �WiU/iam H. Greene, for defendants. �Knowles, D. J. The plaintiff in this case, against whom a verdict was rendered at the June term of this court, now moves that said verdict be set aside, and a new trial of said cause granted, upon three grounds, namely : First, that the verdict was against the evidence, and without evidence to support it ; second, newly-discovered evidence ; third, that the verdict was against the law as charged by the judge. Upon ��� �