Quinebaug Bank v. Leavens
Supreme Court of Connecticut
This was an action against the defendants, as indorsers of an inland bill of exchange; tried, on the general issue, at Norwich, March term, 1849; when the plaintiffs obtained a verdict. The defendants thereupon moved that the verdict be set aside, on the following ground.
Read the full summary
This was an action against the defendants, as indorsers of an inland bill of exchange; tried, on the general issue, at Norwich, March term, 1849; when the plaintiffs obtained a verdict. The defendants thereupon moved that the verdict be set aside, on the following ground. Peleg Thomas, who was one of the jurors who tried the cause, is the father of Edward Y. Thomas, who is, and was, at the time of the trial, a stockholder in The Quinebaug Bank, and thus interested in the cause; which facts were unknown to the defendants, and to their counsel, until after the verdict was rendered. The superior…
1Opinion of the Court
Church, Ch. J.
The question here arises upon a motion in arrest of judgment, which alleges, that one of the jurors in the cause, was the father of one of the stockholders in the Quinebaug Bank, the prevailing party in the action; of which fact the opposite party was ignorant, when the jury was impanneled.
Motions in arrest of judgment, in this state, for causes not apparent of record, are, in truth, only applications for new trials, and are so called and so treated elsewhere. And when such motions prevail, a venire facias de novo is awarded. We see no occasion, therefore, to apply different…
2Cited by12 opinions
- McCarten v. Connecticut Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1925
- State v. JacksonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1882
- State v. BrockhausSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1899
- Rozbicki v. HuybrechtsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
- State v. VogelWisconsin Supreme Court · 1868
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.