Ex parte Caykendoll
New York Supreme Court
Is December term, 1825, of the Orange C. P. a cause was tried between Caykendoll, plaintiff, and Van Bomel, defendant. The action was assumpsit; and the jury found tor the plaintiff, $60 damages.
Read the full summary
Is December term, 1825, of the Orange C. P. a cause was tried between Caykendoll, plaintiff, and Van Bomel, defendant. The action was assumpsit; and the jury found tor the plaintiff, $60 damages. Afterwards, three of the jurors made affidavit that the action was brought on a written agreement for drawing, rafting and running boards, by the plaintiff, for the defendant; that the price fixed by the contract was 9s. per r J J 1000 for drawing, and 10s. for rafting and running; and that in calculating the sum to be allowed the plaintiff, the jury multiplied the number of boards drawn, by 19…
1Opinion of the Court
Curia, per
Sutherland, J.
The decision of the court of common pleas cannot be sustained. It is certainly well settled, that the affidavits of jurors cannot be received to shew a mistake in making up their verdict; and we never intended to detract from that rule in Sargeant v. -, (5 Cowen, 106.) In that case, the counsel advanced an erroneous rule of damages to the jury, which was not corrected in the charge of the judge. The jury were in this way led to adopt the rule. We considered these circumstances equivalent to a positive misdirection of the judge; and allowed the affidavits of jurors to…
2Cited by13 opinions
- Dalrymple v. . WilliamsNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
- Ex parte HenrySupreme Court of Alabama · 1854
- Stromblad v. Hanover Fire InsuranceNew York Supreme Court · 1923
- Webber v. ReynoldsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1898
- Broadway Building Co. v. SaladinoCity of New York Municipal Court · 1913
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.