Durell v. Mosher

Headnote

Where a juror, cause before a the re^“¡ghbourswere p®”^’ *asde' "¡la®“|fl-andastIie right,” this was held not to be a sufficient objecsworn* and em-

action of defend ant promised to return the gouds to the plaintiff; and that lie had nf,t returned ^¡'ent’ evidence and °a* previous ‘lemaud an? re: fusal, need not 1,6 proved,

IN error, on certiorari, from a justice’s court.

Mosher brought an action of trover against Durell, before the justice, for sheep.

A venire was issued, and returned, and the defendant objected to two of the jurors on the panel, that they had sat as jurors on a former trial between the parties, as to the same subject matter of controversy: but it appeared, that that cause had been dismissed, without any verdict . . . . being given, and the justice, therefore, admitted the jurors, in this cause. The defendant then objected to another juror, because that he had said, in a conversation about the controversy, that the defendant was wrong and the plaintiff was right: but it was also proved, that ‘ 1 e ' 1 he, at the same time, said, that he had no personal know-i* r, * . . • n i r ledge or the matter in dispute, but that ir the reports of the neighbours were correct, the defendant was wrong and the plaintiff was right. The justice admitted the juror as competent. r

On the trial, it was proved, that the defendant below had taken two sheep and two lambs out of the flock of the plaintiff, supposing they belonged to him, the defendant ; and that he had, afterwards, promised to return the sheep to the plaintiff, but had failed to do so.

The jury found a verdict for the plaintiff, for eight dollars.