Dana v. Tucker

4 Johns. 487
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedAugust 15, 1809
StatusPublished
Cited by50 cases

This text of 4 Johns. 487 (Dana v. Tucker) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Dana v. Tucker, 4 Johns. 487 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1809).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The better opinion is, and such is the rule adopted by the court, that the affidavits of jurors are not to be received to impeach a verdict; but they may be admitted in exculpation of the jurors, and in support of their verdict. Rejecting the affidavits of the two jurors against the verdict, there is the affidavit of two other jurors in favour of the verdict, which must outweigh that of the constable. If the jurors previously agree to a particular mode of arriving at a verdict, and to abide by the contingent result, at all events, without reserving to themselves the liberty of dissenting, such it [489]*489proceeding would be improper; but if the means is adopt? ed merely for the sake of arriving at a reasonable measure of damages, without binding the jurors by the result, it is no objection to the verdict. Such appears to have been the case here ; and after the result of the division was known, they individually assented to the sum, as their verdict. The motion must be denied.

Rule refused.

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

Related

Miguel Aguilar, Jr. v. State
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2017
Pena-Rodriguez v. Colorado
580 U.S. 206 (Supreme Court, 2017)
Honigsberg v. New York City Transit Authority
43 Misc. 2d 1 (Civil Court of the City of New York, 1964)
Hamp v. State
178 So. 833 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1937)
Dennis v. Tishman
141 Misc. 847 (New York Supreme Court, 1931)
People ex rel. Nunns
188 A.D. 424 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1919)
Phillips v. the Rhode Island Co.
78 A. 342 (Supreme Court of Rhode Island, 1910)
Ogden v. United States
112 F. 523 (Third Circuit, 1902)
Empson Packing Co. v. Vaughn
27 Colo. 66 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1899)
Hamilton v. Owego Water Works
22 A.D. 573 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1897)
Watson v. Reed
46 P. 647 (Washington Supreme Court, 1896)
Wright v. Abbott
36 N.E. 62 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1894)
Gordon v. Trevarthan
34 P. 185 (Montana Supreme Court, 1893)
Moses v. Central Park, North & East River Railroad
23 N.Y.S. 23 (New York Court of Common Pleas, 1893)
People v. Flynn
7 Utah 378 (Utah Supreme Court, 1891)
People v. Flack
9 N.Y.S. 279 (Court Of Oyer And Terminer New York, 1890)
Moore v. New York Elevated Railroad
8 N.Y.S. 329 (New York Court of Common Pleas, 1890)
Village of Ponca v. Crawford
23 Neb. 662 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1888)
Taylor v. Garnett
11 N.E. 309 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1887)
McMurdock v. Kimberlin
23 Mo. App. 523 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1886)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
4 Johns. 487, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dana-v-tucker-nysupct-1809.