Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

24 U.S. 415

6 L. Ed. 508

11 Wheat. 415

Barnes

Supreme Court of the United States

February Term, 1826

Supreme Court of the United States · decided 1826-02-07

<p>Where, in a special verdict, the essential tacts are not distinctly fopnd by the jury, although there is sufficient evidence to establish them, this Court will not render a judgment upon such an imperfect special verdict, but will remand the cause to the Court below, with directions to award a venire facias de novo.</p>

1 counsel of record

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“Although in the opinion of the court there was sufficient evidence in the special verdict from which the jury might have found the fact, yet they have not found it, and the court could not, upon a special verdict, intend it. The special verdict was defective in stating the evidence of the fact, instead of the fact itself. It was impossible, therefore, that a judgment could be pronounced for the plaintiff.”

quoted by 2 later decisions, including Hodges v. Easton, Sun Mutual Insurance v. Ocean Insurance

““Where in a special verdict the essential facts are not distinctly found by the jury, although there is sufficient evidence to establish them, this court will not render judgment upon such an imperfect special verdict, but will remand the case to the court below with directions to award a venire facias de novo.””

quoted by 1 later decision, including Hill v. Walker

Cited in Black's (1910)’s definition of “Revolt”

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Vacated and remanded · 6–0 · Decided 1826-02-07

How this case has been cited

Cited by 29 later decisions (12 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2015 · most notably 135 S. Ct. 2551 - Johnson v. United States (2015), Indianapolis and St Louis Railroad Company v. Horst (1876)

4 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

6018261830184018501860187018801890190019101920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 →

Feb. 6th.

¶1

THIS case was argued by Mr. Wickliffe and Mr. Talbot, for the plaintiffs, and by Mr. White and Mr. Isaacks, for the defendant.

Feb. 7th.

¶2

Mr. Chief Justice MARSHALL stated, that, upon inspecting the record, it had been discovered, that the special verdict found in the case was too imperfect to enable the Court to render a judgment upon it.

¶3

The claim of the plaintiffs being founded upon a bequest of certain slaves, it was essential to a recovery at law, that the assent of the executor to the legacy should be proved. Although, in the opinion of the Court, there was sufficient evidence in the special verdict from which the jury might have found the fact, yet they have not found it, and the Court could not, upon a special verdict, intend it. The special verdict was defective in stating the evidence of the fact, instead of the fact itself. It was impossible, therefore, that a judgment could be pronounced for the plaintiff. So, as to the defendant's defence under the statute of limitations, the special verdict did not find any facts by which the Court could ascertain at that time the right of action accrued. It was not stated that the plaintiff and defendant were ever resident in the same State at the same time. Although it was found, that E. D. Barnes, one of the plaintiffs, came into the State of Tennessee after he arrived at the age of twenty-one years, and more than three years before the suit was brought, yet it was not found, that during any part of that time, the defendant, Williams, was resident in that State. The case was, therefore, too imperfectly stated to enable the Court to decide the questions upon which the opinions of the Judges of the Circuit Court were opposed, and the cause was remanded to that Court, with directions to award a venire facias de novo.

/24/us/415 · .json · Public domain