Case ID: del-cas_1/html/0518-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

JOSEPH BARKER v. THOMAS REYNOLDS.
    Court of Common Pleas.
    December 3, 1814.
    
      Clayton’s Notebook 36.
    
    
      
      Ridgely, for plaintiff,
    moved for a new trial because the jury had given less than they ought.
    
      Clayton and Hall
    
    opposed the motion.
   Per Curiam.

It appeared that Orrell, the clerk, had dealings with the defendant and that the defendant had taken receipts signed “John Orrell” only, which receipts have by the jury been defalked as acknowledgments of Barker, the plaintiff. The circumstances are such, on the whole, that we think plaintiff has not adduced all the evidence in his power and has been surprised.

(Vide Price v. Brown, 2 Str. 691.)

New trial granted.