Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

DISTRICT COURT.

THIS DAT. (Before His Honor F. D. Fentox, Esq., ..., Judge.), J/ ...,.,....,^..,...,,,.^ 8 Application foe New Tbial. jjbnnbtt v. : cassiny This was an application for a new trial of the case Bennett v. Cassin in which Bennett had been awarded £50 damages against Cassin for being by. him illegally imprisoned. Mr Brassey appeared for Cassin, the applicant, and Mr Macdonald for Bennett. „ .. «.;,-•■;■■:■" MPBrassey stated the groundsxm which the application was made, viz., that the damages .were excessively great... The case he'said needed no comment from him as His Honor had himself presided on the.occasion. /■, : T.y;-c;- ■'■■ J-TAt \i-;::a ' Mr Macdonald opposed the application on the ground that the' Onus of showing that the^ damages were excessive rested on the party making the -application, and this they had failed todo. The damages he urged were not excessive.* The plain- 1 tiff might had he wished have taken the case to the' Supreme Couri;' and in that case the amount awarded would have been considered very-reasonable and no new trial^ would. have, .been dreamed., of,, and that'the^only 1 treason the: ctfse had'been brought into the Court here.was on the ground of economy.; 1 More than was not a question of excessive damages only; or'damages otter than the Judge himself would allow, but that they, must be outrageously excessive so as to'"Bh'6fr prejudice,or, some such motive,,on their part. There was ah entire absence of this sort of thing on thja part of the jury he contended, and therefore the claim to a new trial could not be entertained. It >>was not for the Judger; to decide that-the damages were excessive or that they appear to be excessive to any unprejudiced person, but the jury had to decide what seem to them best; an&ras -in. this case, where ,no calculations; of - "■ actual pecuniary loss could* tie ehterlaine'd it became aY matter) of-sentiment and feeling on the part of the jury. He quoted authorities to back' his view of the case. In" conclusion he argued that the jury having found a verdict of £50 there was nothing'brought before the notice of the Court to upset that verdict.... * "Mr Brassey replied to Mr Macdonald and urged that the damages as granted were excesshe.

sHis Worship said that it was needless for! Mr Brassey to proceed, he -was quite clear that the judge had the power to grant a new trial if he sa.w fit, and whatever were his own opinions as to the propriety of giving the judge that power, still he had that po.wer and was bound to use it if he thought right; in this case he certainly thought the damages ware excessive and therefore would grant leare for a fresh trial. -

The Court reserved the question of the costs of the first trial until after the termination of the second trial.

The case was therefore ordered to be tried next Court day. /. „,...,..,...

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/THS18750921.2.13

Bibliographic details

Thames Star, Volume VII, Issue 2095, 21 September 1875, Page 2

Word Count
479

DISTRICT COURT. Thames Star, Volume VII, Issue 2095, 21 September 1875, Page 2

DISTRICT COURT. Thames Star, Volume VII, Issue 2095, 21 September 1875, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert