Brown v. Cowell
New York Supreme Court
IN ERROR, on certiorari to a justice’s court. After the iury, in the court below, had retired, they sent and J J 1 . ’ ’ J ?-ecIuested *e&ve examine Briggs ^ one of the witnesses.
Read the full summary
IN ERROR, on certiorari to a justice’s court. After the iury, in the court below, had retired, they sent and J J 1 . ’ ’ J ?-ecIuested *e&ve examine Briggs ^ one of the witnesses. The justice applied to the parties, to know if they would consent to being examined, to which they agreed, and the justice went with the witness into the room where the jury were ; whether the parties went with them or not, did not appear, One of the jurors asked the, witness, if Kinney, who had testified on the same trial, had not sworn false on some former trial; to which the witness immediately answered in the…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
This judgment must be affirmed. The admission of the witness to be re-examined privately, by the jury, would have been improper had not the parties consented to it. .And although the question, put by the juror, was improper, the answer was given before the justice could correct it, and he did. every thing that he could do, by telling the jury that the evidence was improper. Besides, the parties, having consented to the examination, ought not now to be permitted to object to what took place upon such examination,
Judgment affirmed.
2Cited by5 opinions
- Richards v. NoyesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1878
- Beggs v. Chicago, Wisconsin & Minnesota RailroadWisconsin Supreme Court · 1890
- Allen v. Town of HancockSupreme Court of Vermont · 1844
- People v. Soule, New York County Courts1913
- Batchelder v. BatchelderMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1861