Brainard v. Patterson

21 A.2d 29, 342 Pa. 465, 1941 Pa. LEXIS 550
CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedMay 13, 1941
DocketAppeal, 104
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 21 A.2d 29 (Brainard v. Patterson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Brainard v. Patterson, 21 A.2d 29, 342 Pa. 465, 1941 Pa. LEXIS 550 (Pa. 1941).

Opinion

Per Curiam,

This appeal is from a new-trial order made in consequence of the conduct of the court officer in charge of *466 the jury. Toward midnight, after the jury had been deliberating some hours, they inquired of the officer about sleeping accommodations and were informed by him, or understood him to say, they could not separate until after they had agreed on a verdict. Sometime about 2:30 a. m. they found for the defendant. The learned judge held that, in the circumstances, the verdict had been coerced within the rule applied in Welshire v. Bruaw, 331 Pa. 392, 200 A. 67. There was no abuse of discretion. The other questions need not be referred to.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Davidson v. Patterson
21 A.2d 30 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1941)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
21 A.2d 29, 342 Pa. 465, 1941 Pa. LEXIS 550, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brainard-v-patterson-pa-1941.