Case Name: ROBERT W. SELLERS AND JOHN W. DIX v. GEORGE C. GREEN, W. HARRISON LIVERMORE, WILLIAM R. DOPSON AND JOHN STACKENWALT; ROBERT W. SELLERS AND JOHN W. DIX v. THE WOODBURY MANUFACTURING COMPANY AND ALEXANDER CRAIG
Court: New Jersey Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1903-02-24
Citations: 69 N.J.L. 228
Docket Number: 
Parties: ROBERT W. SELLERS AND JOHN W. DIX v. GEORGE C. GREEN, W. HARRISON LIVERMORE, WILLIAM R. DOPSON AND JOHN STACKENWALT. ROBERT W. SELLERS AND JOHN W. DIX v. THE WOODBURY MANUFACTURING COMPANY AND ALEXANDER CRAIG.
Judges: Before Gummere, Chief Justice, and Justices Van Syckel, Fort and Pitney.
Reporter: New Jersey Law Reports
Volume: 69
Pages: 228–229

Head Matter:
ROBERT W. SELLERS AND JOHN W. DIX v. GEORGE C. GREEN, W. HARRISON LIVERMORE, WILLIAM R. DOPSON AND JOHN STACKENWALT. ROBERT W. SELLERS AND JOHN W. DIX v. THE WOODBURY MANUFACTURING COMPANY AND ALEXANDER CRAIG.
Submitted December 29, 1902
Decided February 24, 1903.
Where two separate actions of tort, by the same plaintiffs against different defendants, were tried together, and the trial judge instructed the jury that the actions were separate and gave separate instructions in each case, and the jury rendered but a single verdict against all the defendants, saving one, who was discharged by order of the judge, there must be a new trial.
On rules to show cause.
Before Gummere, Chief Justice, and Justices Van Syckel, Fort and Pitney.
For the plaintiffs, John Meirs.
For the defendants, Austin H. Swackhamer.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
These are actions of tort, and were tried together at the Camden Circuit. The state of the case shows that the defend ants in one case were charged- with an unlawful entry upon the plaintiffs premises on the 9th day of 'January, 1901, and the defendants in the other case were charged with a separate and independent act of trespass committed upon the same premises three days later. The trial judge instructed the jury that the actions were separate, and gave separate instructions in each case. In spite of this, the jury rendered but a single verdict, which was a finding of $3,500 damages as against all the defendants in the two cases, saving one individual, who was discharged by order of the judge. It is obvious that this mistake on the part of the jury can only be remedied by a new trial.
Let the rules to show cause be made absolute.