Moss v. Priest
The Superior Court of New York City
■ Appeal from an order amending a verdict. The action was tried before one of the justices of the court and a jury. At the close of the evidence the presiding justice directed such jury to.bring in a general verdict; and also to answer in writing certain written questions presented to them by him, affirmatively or negatively, according to their opinion, as to how they should be answered from the evidence. The jury rendered a .general verdict in favor of the plaintiff.
Read the full summary
■ Appeal from an order amending a verdict. The action was tried before one of the justices of the court and a jury. At the close of the evidence the presiding justice directed such jury to.bring in a general verdict; and also to answer in writing certain written questions presented to them by him, affirmatively or negatively, according to their opinion, as to how they should be answered from the evidence. The jury rendered a .general verdict in favor of the plaintiff. But their foreman, when called upon by the clerk of the court for their answers to such particular written questions, through…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court*—Robertson, J.
The Code of Procedure provides (§ 261) that the court may in all cases instruct the jury, if they render a general verdict, to find upon particular questions of fact to be stated in writing, and may direct a written finding thereon, and which special finding shall be filed with the clerk and entered on the minutes.
In the present case, questions of fact were stated in writing by the presiding justice, and the jury were directed to answer them in the affirmative or negative, as under the evidence they thought proper. They took with them, on retiring to deliberate, the…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Lafayette v. BassSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1926
- National Refining Co. v. MillerSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1891
- Rohr v. IsaacsOregon Supreme Court · 1880
- Ebersole v. Northern Central Railway Co.New York Supreme Court · 1880