PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE-TRIAL PRACTICE-JUROR AFFIDAVITS

Authors

Paul M.D. Harrison S. Ed., University of Michigan Law SchoolFollow

Abstract

The jury, in an action for trespass, returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff and thereafter separated after being dismissed by the court. Subsequently, a juror reported to the court that the verdict as returned did not express the actual agreement of the jury. Five days after dismissal the jury was recalled and, upon being polled, unanimously agreed that the verdict as returned did not represent the actual agreement of the jury due to an error in computation. The jury was sent back to the jury room under instructions to refigure the verdict only upon evidence already presented in the prior trial. A $500 verdict in favor of the plaintiff was thereafter returned. Held, reversed. The trial court acted properly in receiving the statements of the juror that the verdict as returned did not express the actual agreement of the jury, but the verdict should have been set aside and a new trial granted. Kennedy v. Stocker, (Vt. 1950) 70 A. (2d) 587.

Recommended Citation

Paul M. Harrison S. Ed., PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE-TRIAL PRACTICE-JUROR AFFIDAVITS, 49 Mich. L. Rev. 768 (1951).
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol49/iss5/14