Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

2 Del. 387

Chandler v. Barker

Superior Court of Delaware

Decided July 1, 1838

Superior Court of Delaware · decided 1838-07-01

Action on the case for words. Trial and verdict for the plaintiff, with $86 68 damages. On the rendering the verdict the jury was polled at the request of defendant’s counsel, and severally agreed to the verdict.

Decided 1838-07-01

Per Curiam.

¶1The affidavit of the defendant ought to have been filed as the foundation of this motion, and for the purpose of notice to the other side. The mode of proof is objectionable. It is not necessary to decide that the declarations of a juror after separation can, in no case, be proved to impeach the verdict, though the cases seem strong against it; but the proving such declarations by the attorney of the losing party is objectionable.

¶2Mr. Booth does not prove that the sum found was not the result of deliberation after setting down and dividing; and the polling the jury is strong that they had so deliberated.

¶3This is not a good mode of arriving at a verdict; and, under circumstances, it might be considered fatally objectionable; but it is not necessarily corrupt. It may be a mere means of approximating a result; and, as we are satisfied on the whole with the finding of the jury, we refuse to set aside the verdict.

¶4Motion refused.

/2/del/387 · .json · Public domain