Sutliff v. Gilbert
Ohio Supreme Court
This case was removed from 'the Supreme Court of the county ©f Trumbull to this court by writ of error. The original case was an action of trespass de bonis aspertatis commenced by Gilbert, the defendantin error, against the plaintiffs- To the declaration the defendants pleaded the general issue, and, at the same time, gave notice in substance that on the trial of the case they would insist, by way of defense, that the goods in controversy were the goods of one Garry Lewis;…
Read the full summary
This case was removed from 'the Supreme Court of the county ©f Trumbull to this court by writ of error. The original case was an action of trespass de bonis aspertatis commenced by Gilbert, the defendantin error, against the plaintiffs- To the declaration the defendants pleaded the general issue, and, at the same time, gave notice in substance that on the trial of the case they would insist, by way of defense, that the goods in controversy were the goods of one Garry Lewis; that several-judgments had been recovered in favor of divers persons in the-court of common pleas and Supreme Court of…
1Opinion of the Court
* Judge Hitchcock
delivered the opinion of the court:
Two questions seem to be necessarily involved in the examination of the first error assigned in this case. The first is, whether' after a jury have retired to consider of their verdict, and shall have separated before returning their verdict to the court, they can afterward be permitted to retire to their room and further deliberate upon the case submitted to them; and, second, whether it-is in the power of the court, after a jury shall have agreed upon their verdict, and delivered the same in court, to send them out again for further…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Coughlin v. WeeksWashington Supreme Court · 1913
- De Boer v. Toledo Soccer Partners, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1989
- Green v. BlissNew York Supreme Court · 1856
- Lehrer v. Cleveland Railway Co.Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court · 1918