PER CURIAM.
Appellants, who were the losing plaintiffs in an automobile negligence case, complain of the lower court's action in denying their motion for a new trial based upon newly discovered evidence, to wit, the testimony of an eyewitness who could not have been found with due diligence up to the time of trial.
We do not believe that the testimony of this witness necessarily demonstrates that the defendants' witnesses gave false testimony, and appellants...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
