McIlvaine v. Wilkins
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit, for goods sold and delivered, according to an account annexed to the writ. In order to prove the delivery of the articles charged in the account, the plaintiff offered in evidence his book of accounts, with his suppletory oath. Upon his cross-examination it appeared that the articles were delivered by a third person, whereupon the book was rejected as evidence by the court.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit, for goods sold and delivered, according to an account annexed to the writ. In order to prove the delivery of the articles charged in the account, the plaintiff offered in evidence his book of accounts, with his suppletory oath. Upon his cross-examination it appeared that the articles were delivered by a third person, whereupon the book was rejected as evidence by the court. In addition to the inquiries made by the defendant’s counsel touching the delivery of the articles, he put further questions relating to the case. The court thereupon ruled that the plaintiff’s counsel might…
1Opinion of the CourtGilchrist, J.
The defendant, in this case, has moved for a new trial, on account of the conversation between the witness and one of the jury. It is singular, that notwithstanding the efforts made by the court to impress upon the jury the necessity of their entire freedom from suspicion of partiality, applications for new trials, on account of alleged misconduct of the jury, are so frequent. The injunctions by the court upon the jury are, invariably, that they do not converse among themselves upon the subject of the trial, until they retire to deliberate upon the verdict ; that they hold no conversation…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Hilton v. SouthwickSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1840
- Liotard v. GravesNew York Supreme Court · 1805
- Gammell v. SkinnerU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1814
- Mahurin v. BickfordSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1834
- Hoar v. CluteNew York Supreme Court · 1818
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Mast Road Grain & Building Materials Co. v. Ray Piet, Inc.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1985
- Swamscot Machine Co. v. PartridgeSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1852
- Mead v. WheelerSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1843
- Allen, Cummings & Co. v. AldrichSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1854