Buckeye Cotton Oil Co. v. Owen

• Decision Date: 12 April 1920
• Docket Number: 20971
• Citation: 84 So. 133,122 Miss. 14
• Court: Mississippi Supreme Court
• Parties: BUCKEYE COTTON OIL CO. v. OWEN

84 So. 133

122 Miss. 14

BUCKEYE COTTON OIL CO. v. OWEN

No. 20971

Supreme Court of Mississippi

April 12, 1920

March 1920

1 TRIAL. Quotient verdict irregular if result of agreement.

A verdict arrived at by adding together the amounts the several jurors thought should be awarded to the plaintiff and dividing the sum thus obtained by twelve, pursuant to a previous agreement by the jurors so to do, is irregular and will be set aside.

2. TRIAL. To render quotient verdict error, previous agreement is necessary.

A quotient verdict will not be set aside unless it affirmatively appears from the evidence that the jurors agreed in advance to return such a verdict.

HON. H H. Elmore, Judge.

APPEAL from circuit court of Layfayette county, HON. H. H. Elmore Judge.

Action by Will Owen against the Buckeye Cotton Oil Company. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals.

Affirmed.

Basil L. Mayes and S. L. Gwin, for appellant.

Gardner, McBee & Gardner, for appellee.

OPINION

SMITH, C. J.

This is an appeal from a judgment awarding the appellee damages alleged to have been sustained by him because of the negligence of the appellant.

There is no reversible error, if error at all, in any of the matters complained of, only one of which will be hero specifically noticed, and that is that the jury returned a quotient verdict. This question was raised in the court below on the motion for a new trial, and it appears from the evidence introduced in support thereof, as set forth in the opinion rendered by the trial judge:

"That within a minute or two after the jury had retired the jury sent word to the judge not to be in a hurry, that they would be out presently, and at the same time called for some paper which was carried to them by the deputy sheriff; and that within about fifteen minutes the jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff for one thousand dollars. The next morning early, one of the attorneys for defendant found in the jury room twelve ballots on which were written different amounts from three hundred to two thousand dollars, and a sheet of paper with a column of figures corresponding in amounts exactly to the amounts on the ballots; and this column of figures had been added on that sheet of paper and the sum divided by twelve, leaving a quotient of nine hundred seventy dollars."

All of the figures on the sheet of paper which contained the column of figures corresponding to those on the ballots were in the handwriting of one of the jurors. The trial judge was of the opinion, in...