Barber v. James

Decided February 6, 1895

Supreme Court of Rhode Island · decided 1895-02-06

<p>Where a statute directs that twelve good and lawful men sliall be returned to serve as jurors, a greater number may properly be summoned in order to obtain tbe twelve good and lawful men required.</p> <p>A party bas no ground of complaint because of the exclusion of proper testimony of a witness,-where he has had the benefit of the testimony in the previous answers of the witness.</p>

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1895-02-06

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently April 1955

7 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Per Curiam.

¶1 We find no error in the action of the court in summoning more than twelve jurors. Pub. Stat. R. I. cap. 104, § 4, directs that twelve good and lawful men shall be returned. The summoning of more than twelve may frequently be necessary in order to secure the twelve good and lawful men required. If these are obtained, the defendant can have no ground of complaint because more than twelve good men were summoned to attain this result. Fitchburg R. R. Co. v. B. & M. Railroad, 3 Cush. 58, 85; Hosmer v. Warner, 15 Gray, 46.

¶2 The defendant has no ground of complaint because of the alleged exclusion of the testimony of Shippee. Assuming that the testimony was proper, the defendant had already had the benefit of it in the previous answers of the witness.

*799 Samuel W. K. Allen, for plaintiff. John M. Brennan, for defendants.

¶3 We see no occasion to disturb the verdict on the ground that the damages were excessive.