History
  • No items yet
midpage
Wood v. Kenney
104 Conn. 738
| Conn. | 1926
|
Check Treatment

The error assigned in failing to correct the finding in accordance with exceptions one and two cannot be considered, since the appellant has not complied *Page 739 with the requirements of our procedure. See General Statutes, §§ 5830, 5831; Rules of Supreme Court of Errors, § 11 (Practice Book, p. 309).

The fourth error assigned in denying the plaintiff's motion in arrest is based upon the claimed misconduct of a juror. The finding of facts discloses that there was no misconduct of the juror, that the claimed misconduct was too trivial for consideration, that the act alleged was not occasioned by the prevailing party or anyone in his behalf, and that it did not unfavorably prejudice the appellant. State v. Rubuka, 82 Conn. 59,61, 72 A. 566; Pettibone v. Phelps, 13 Conn. 444;Wood v. Holah, 80 Conn. 314, 316, 68 A. 323. Under such circumstances the trial court could not have legally sustained the motion in arrest.

There is no error.

Case Details

Case Name: Wood v. Kenney
Court Name: Supreme Court of Connecticut
Date Published: Mar 4, 1926
Citation: 104 Conn. 738
Court Abbreviation: Conn.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.