Bradt v. Rommel

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Bradt v. Rommel

5 N.W. 680, 26 Minn. 505, 1880 Minn. LEXIS 201

CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota

DecidedMay 10, 1880

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 5 N.W. 680 (Bradt v. Rommel) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Minnesota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bradt v. Rommel, 5 N.W. 680, 26 Minn. 505, 1880 Minn. LEXIS 201 (Mich. 1880).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court.

That the affidavit of a juror cannot be used, on a motion to set a verdict aside, to show misconduct on the-part of the jury, is a rule of so long standing, so uniformly acted on by all the courts in England and in this country, including this court, that it cannot be departed from, whatever reasons may have originally led to its adoption. The rule, however, does not apply to any one but jurors. The affidavit of the sheriff was, therefore, competent, but it does, not show the misconduct alleged

Judgment affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

By the Court.

That the affidavit of a juror cannot be used, on a motion to set a verdict aside, to show misconduct on the-part of the jury, is a rule of so long standing, so uniformly acted on by all the courts in England and in this country, including this court, that it cannot be departed from, whatever reasons may have originally led to its adoption. The rule, however, does not apply to any one but jurors. The affidavit of the sheriff was, therefore, competent, but it does, not show the misconduct alleged

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 N.W. 680, 26 Minn. 505, 1880 Minn. LEXIS 201, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bradt-v-rommel-minn-1880.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack