TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Hubbard v. Gale

Joshua G. Hubbard v. John Gale & another

Hubbard v. Gale, 105 Mass. 511 (1870)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
November 15, 1870
Citations
105 Mass. 511
Headnotes
Upon a motion to set aside a verdict and grant a new trial, on the ground of disability of a juror by sickness, the question whether the state of his health prevented a proper performance of his duty is a question of fact, the decision of which is not a subject of exceptions.
Summary
Contract. Trial and verdict for the plaintiff in the superior court. The defendants moved to set aside the verdict and for a new trial, upon the ground “ that after the case was committed to the jury one of the jurors was sick and thereby was unable to discharge his duties as a juror.” At the hearing on this motion, before Pitman, J., it appeared that the case was committed to the jury late in the afternoon, and they agreed upon the verdict about midnight; that during this interval one of them was ill, as stated by himself in a writing which he addressed to the judge, asking to be released from the jury on the ground that he had a severe cold, accompanied with headache and with severe pain in his back, felt feverish, and if at home should feel compelled to take to his bed; that he delivered this writing to the officer in charge of the jury, between nine and ten o’clock in the evening, and the officer forwarded it to the judge, who returned it with a memorandum that the juror might be discharged if the counsel of the parties would sign an agreement for his discharge and a waiver of any objection to the return of a verdict by the remaining jurors ; that the officer dispatched a messenger to search for the counsel, but they could not be found; that the officer had no further communication with the jury until after midnight, when he was informed that they had agreed on a verdict, and discharged them; and that the state of the sick juror’s health was unknown to the defendants or their counsel until after the verdict was returned. • On these facts the defendants contended that the juror’s sickness entitled them, as matter of law, to a new trial; but the judge ruled otherwise, and overruled their motion, and they alleged exceptions.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

By the Court.

The state of the juror’s health was a question of fact, to be decided by the presiding judge, and his decision was final, and not subject to exceptions.

Exceptions overruled.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1885–1886: 11925–1926: 118852026peak 1885 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Kearney v. Snodgrass7 P. 309 (Or. 1885)
  2. Dixon v. A. J. Cunningham Co.153 N.E. 257 (Mass. 1926)

Most recent

  1. Dixon v. A. J. Cunningham Co.153 N.E. 257 (Mass. 1926)
  2. Kearney v. Snodgrass7 P. 309 (Or. 1885)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list