Tenney v. Evans
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Trover. After a trial and verdict for the plaintiff, the defendant moved that it be set aside, and that a new trial be granted, on account of the partial, and improper conduct of the foreman of the jury ; and also because the plaintiff had tampered with some of the jurymen.
Read the full summary
Trover. After a trial and verdict for the plaintiff, the defendant moved that it be set aside, and that a new trial be granted, on account of the partial, and improper conduct of the foreman of the jury ; and also because the plaintiff had tampered with some of the jurymen. In support of the motion, the defendant laid before the court the affidavits of four witnesses, to prove that the foreman had made declarations, before the trial, which evinced a feeling of partiality towards the plaintiff. There was also evidence that the plaintiff had said that the foreman would give him the case, if he…
1Opinion of the CourtGilchrist, J.
The affidavits of the foreman, and of one of the jurors, have been laid before us for the purpose of removing any impression unfavorable to the verdict caused by the evidence offered to impeach it. The decisions on the admissibility of the evidence of jurors, in relation to their *464verdict, are contradictory. In the case of Saville vs. Lord Farnham, 2 Man. & Ry. 216, Lord Tenterden asked Brougham, in a manner that implied a doubt, whether he could read the affidavit of a juryman ? The learned counsel replied that “ he could not, as to the conduct of the jury.” He was then endeavoring to show…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Bridge v. EgglestonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1817
- Dana v. TuckerNew York Supreme Court · 1809
- People v. Columbia Common PleasNew York Supreme Court · 1828
- State v. HascallSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1833
- Tyler v. StevensSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1827
3Cited by2 opinions
- Caldwell v. YeatmanSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1940
- Leighton v. SargentSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1855