Iverson v. Pacific American Fisheries
Washington Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtHill, J.
This is an appeal from an order granting a new trial, after a verdict for the defendant (11 to 1) in a personal injury action.
The trial court was convinced that an instruction given the deadlocked jury coerced two jurors into a defense verdict.
The circumstances leading to that conclusion were: That at about 10 p.m., after 8 hours of deliberation, the jury sent a note 1 to the court advising that they were deadlocked— standing 9 to 3 for the defendant; the Washington Pattern Jury Instruction (WPI 1.05) 2 intended for such circum stances, was then read to the jury; 10 minutes after returning to…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- State v. PeirceSupreme Court of Iowa · 1916
- O'BRIEN v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1958
- In Re SternSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1953
- Mead v. City of Richland CenterWisconsin Supreme Court · 1941
- Middle States Utilities Co. v. Incorporated Telephone Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1937
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Hue v. Farmboy Spray Co., Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1995
- Rueth v. StateIdaho Supreme Court · 1978
- State v. BoogaardWashington Supreme Court · 1978
- State v. WatkinsWashington Supreme Court · 1983
- State v. McCullumCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1981
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.