¶1were of opinion, that it was dangerous to take the affidavits of j urors as' to mistakes' of calculations, &c.; but on reading the. affidavits, there did not appear to have been an error in the foreman’s calculation, and a new trial was refused. '- The Court, however, wished it not to be considered as giving a sanetion to the practice of taking such affidavits of jurymen; ■
1 D.C. 305
Ladd v. Wilson
District of Columbia District Court
Decided March 15, 1806
District of Columbia District Court · decided 1806-03-15
Verdict for the plaintiff. Motion by the defendant’ for a new trial, grounded on the affidavits of three or four'of the jurymen, that a mistake was made by the foreman in-calculating upon the principles agreed on by the jury ; some of the others, particularly the foreman, believed there was no mistake. cited Vasie v. Delaval, 1 T. R. 11, and Cochran v. Street, 1 Wash.'79. '■
Decided 1806-03-15