Response or Comment
One of the common grounds of a new trial is that the verdict is contrary to law. What law is meant,--the law as it really is, or the law that was given to the jury by the court's instruction? Most cases hold to the latter view. It is the duty of the jury to take the law from the court, whether the court in so giving it is right or wrong. Hence, the jury violate their duty if they fail to follow instructions, even if the instructions are wrong, and a verdict based on a breach of the jury's duty cannot be allowed to stand, even though intrinsically correct. Talley v. Whitlock, (Ala., 1917) 73 So. 976; Gartner v. Mohan, 39 S. D. 202; Yellow Poplar Lumber Co., v. Bartley, 164 Ky., 763; Soderburg v. Chicago St. P. M. & 0. Ry. Co, 67 Ia., 123; Freel v. Pietzsch, 22 N. D., 113; Barton v. Shull, 62 Neb., 570; Dent v. Bryce 16 S. C., I4; Murray v. Heinze, 17 Mont., 353.
Sunderland, Edson R. "Should a Correct Verdict Be Set Aside Because the Jury Failed to Follow Erroneous Instructions?" Mich. L. Rev. 17 (1919): 592-4.