Folsom v. Concord & Montreal Railroad

Ordinarily the special will control the general verdict. Richardson v. Weare, 62 N. H. 80. The instructions in this case were correct, and if it were certain that the jury in answering the first question were not confused or misled, the defendants would be entitled to judgment. There is ground for contending that the “ act” was understood by them to mean want of ordinary care. Undoubtedly that was what was intended by the propounder of the interrogations. But if the jury so understood, it is difficult to explain by what process they reached the conclusion embodied in the general verdict. The…