Haycraft v. Griggsby

• Decision Date: 15 April 1902
• Parties: HAYCRAFT v. GRIGGSBY et al.
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

67 S.W. 965

94 Mo. A. 74

HAYCRAFT v. GRIGGSBY et al.

Court of Appeals of St. Louis, Missouri.

April 15, 1902.

APPEAL — TRIAL — VERDICT — EFFECT OF SECOND VERDICT — PASSION AND PREJUDICE — MISCONDUCT OF JURY — SUFFICIENCY OF SHOWING.

1. Where a second verdict is returned in favor of a party, it will not be set aside on appeal, as being so opposed to the evidence as to show that it resulted from undue partiality or prejudice.

2. A judgment will not be set aside on the ground that the jury was approached by parties favorable to the winning party, or improperly influenced in any way, except on a strong showing of such misconduct.

Appeal from circuit court, Audrain county; E. M. Hughes, Judge.

Action by E. F. Haycraft against Dollie Griggsby and another. From a judgment for defendants, the plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

Geo. Robertson and D. A. Murphy, for appellant. B. H. Cullen and W. H. Logan, for respondents.

GOODE, J.

This case was before us on a former appeal, and the judgment was then reversed, and the cause remanded to be retried, because of certain erroneous directions to the jury. Haycraft v. Griggsby, 88 Mo. App. 354. We have perused the voluminous printed record sent up on this appeal, and find that it was tried the second time on evidence and instructions not materially different from what were contained in the former record, except that the court's instructions were corrected in respect to the faults pointed out in the opinion of this court; so that the issues were fairly submitted to the jury, if we were right in that opinion, as, on further consideration, we think we were. A second verdict having been returned in favor of the defendants, we shall overrule the appellant's exception that the finding was so opposed to the evidence as to prove it resulted from undue partiality or prejudice. Neither do we sustain the contention that the jury was approached by persons favorable to the defendants, or improperly influenced in any way, as to which assignment of error the affidavits filed by the appellant fail to make a suitable showing, and the showing must needs be strong for us to interfere with the circuit court's action on that ground.

The judgment is affirmed. All concur