Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

560 So. 2d 835

Docket Nos. 90-C-0572, 90-C-0603, 90-C-0634.

Wright v. Hirsch

Valerie WRIGHT v. Bernard HIRSCH, M.D., New Orleans General Hospital and Insurance Corporation of America.

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Decided May 11, 1990.

Supreme Court of Louisiana · decided 1990-05-11

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“[a] new trial shall be granted, upon contradictory motion of any party, in the following cases:... (3) When the jury was bribed or has behaved improperly so that impartial justice has not been done.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 700 So. 2d 932 - Brown v. Hudson

Relies on Wright v. Hirsch

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1990-05-11

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently September 2017

8 state decisions

30199020002010decided

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 →

¶1*836 PER CURIAM.

¶2Plaintiff moved for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict or in the alternative a new trial on the ground, inter alia, that the jury "behaved improperly so that impartial justice has not been done." Attached to this motion was an affidavit of plaintiff's counsel's "legal intern" alleging that one of the jurors stated to her that after the jury had recessed for the evening on November 15, 1988, he (the juror) had conducted independent research by reading various books on the subject which information he had conveyed to the other jurors during deliberations.

¶3The trial judge denied the motion. On appeal, the court of appeal reversed and remanded for a new trial. 556 So.2d 109. The court of appeal concluded, based upon the information in the affidavit, that the "jury misconduct is prejudicial and is of such a grievous nature that to preclude the impartial administration of justice", citing La.Code Cov.P. art 1972(3).

¶4Based upon the affidavit alone and the fact that no evidence was adduced at the hearing on the motion, we are unable to say that the trial judge abused his discretion in denying plaintiff's motion for a new trial. The court of appeal erred in holding otherwise. Accordingly, we reverse and remand the case to the court of appeal to consider the remaining arguments raised on appeal.

/560/so2d/835 · .json · Public domain