Dorgan & Young Hdw. Co. v. Stephens
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from Mobile Circuit Court. Heard before Hon. Thomas W. Coleman, Jr. Action between the Dorgan & Young Hardware Company and S. T. Stephens and another. From a judgment granting a new trial, the former appeals. The fact that the juror ivas disqualified was known to counsel and ho objection was interposed at the time.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Mobile Circuit Court. Heard before Hon. Thomas W. Coleman, Jr. Action between the Dorgan & Young Hardware Company and S. T. Stephens and another. From a judgment granting a new trial, the former appeals. The fact that the juror ivas disqualified was known to counsel and ho objection was interposed at the time. It cannot, therefore, be made by the basis for a new trial. — Daniels v. The ¡Atate, 88 Ala. 220; 24 Cyc. 216; 17 A. & E. Ency of Law, 1163; Wasswm v. Feeney, 23 Am. Rep. 258; 52 Atl. 214; 26-Mich. 426; 39 L. R. A. 302; Sowell v. Bank of Brew-ion, 119 Ala. 92. No brief came…
1Opinion of the CourtDowdell, C. J.
This appeal is taken from the judgment of the circuit court on a motion for a new trial. The only ground of the motion Avas the disqualification of one of the jurors Avho tried the case.
The affidavit of the defendant in support of his motion did not negative knoAvledge or notice of the alleged *661disqualification of the juror by tbe defendant’s counsel before and at tbe time of entering upon tbe trial. On the bearing of tbe motion it was shown by tbe juror, who was sworn and examined, that whatever disqualification existed, if any, and this we need not decide, was known to tbe defendant’s…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Sowell v. Bank of BrewtonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1898
- Cannon v. BullockSupreme Court of Georgia · 1858
3Cited by2 opinions
- Mutual Building & Loan Ass'n v. WatsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1933
- Mendenhall v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1916