Case Name: Talmadge v. Northrop
Court: Connecticut Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Connecticut
Decision Date: 1792-08
Citations: 1 Root 454
Docket Number: 
Parties: Talmadge v. Northrop.
Judges: 
Reporter: Connecticut Reports
Volume: 1
Pages: 454–455

Head Matter:
Talmadge v. Northrop.
A witness interested in the question not admitted.
A good cause of arrest that one of the jurors is interested in the same question.
Action of the case; declaring, that on the 23d of June, A. D. 1789, the plaintiff sold to Luman Bishop; a number of shipping horses to the value of £82 5s. lawful money, that said Luman being a stranger to the plaintiff, and having the appearance of a man of property, upon his application and request the plaintiff took said Luman’s note for £51 5s. of said purchase money payable the 5th of August then next; that said Bishop was then and ever since had been- a bankrupt, of whom said debt was not recoverable; that the defendant was before, and at the time of selling said horses to said Bishop; and Ills giving his note aforesaid, secretly in partnership with said Luman when he purchased said horses of the plaintiff, and that said Luman gave his note aforesaid for the use of the defendant, and that the defendant had taken, the benefit of said horses and shipped them to the West Indies and received the avails; whereby an action had accrued to the plaintiff to recover of the defendant said sum of £51 5s. lawful money and interest, etc. Plea- — Hot guilty. Issue to the jury.
The plaintiff offered one Bird as a witness, to whom it was objected that he was interested in the point in question; for that he had a claim against the defendant for horses sold to said Bishop on credit about the same time, which went in the same drove and were shipped in the same vessel, and his recovering depended upon the same secret partnership claimed by the plaintiff.

Opinion:
By the Court.
He cannot be a witness. The jury found a verdict for the plaintiff, and £60 8s. 5d. damages.
The defendant moved in arrest of judgment- — That Jonathan Wright one of the jurors who tried said cause had a similar demand upon the defendant with the plaintiff, for two horses sold on said Bishop about the same time, on credit, which went in the same drove, and were shipped in the same vessel, and was waiting to see the event of this suit, of which the defendant was wholly ignorant, when said jury were impaneled. Demurrer.
Judgment — Motion in arrest sufficient, and a repleader ordered.