Case Name: GEO. W. LAMBOURNE, Respondent, v. JNO. HALFIN, Appellant
Court: Utah Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Utah
Decision Date: 1901-05-14
Citations: 23 Utah 489
Docket Number: 
Parties: GEO. W. LAMBOURNE, Respondent, v. JNO. HALFIN, Appellant.
Judges: Baslciri, J., concurs.
Reporter: Utah Reports
Volume: 23
Pages: 489–493

Head Matter:
GEO. W. LAMBOURNE, Respondent, v. JNO. HALFIN, Appellant.
Trial — Chance Verdict — New Trial — When Granted!
Under the provisions of Revised Statutes 1898, section 3292, subdivision 2, providing that a new trial shall be granted whenever one or more of the jurors have been induced to assent to the verdict by a resort to the determination of chance, where it clearly appears that the amount of the verdict was determined by each juror fixing the amount to be awarded, adding them together, 'and dividing result by the number of jurors, a fiew trial will be granted.
Rolapp, District Judge, dissenting.
Decided May 14, 1901.
Appeal from District Court, Salt Lake County. — Hon, A. N. Cherry, Judge.
Action by George W. Lambourne against John Halfin. Erom a judgment in favor of tbe plaintiff and a denial of a motion for a new trial, defendant appeals.
REVERSED.
Messrs. Pierce, Critchlow & Barrette for appellant.
Messrs. Krebs & Hoppa/ugh for respondent.
Wright v. Railroad Co., 22 Utah 338; 62 Pac. 317, followed.

Opinion:
BARTCH, J.
Tbe jury in this ease returned a verdict in favor of tbe plaintiff for tbe sum of $1,650, and judgment was entered accordingly. Thereupon tbe defendant made a motion for a new trial upon tbe ground of misconduct of tbe jury, and tbat tbe jurors were induced to assent to such verdict by a resort to a determination of cbance. Tbe motion for a new trial was overruled, and tbe defendant appealed.
Tbe sole question presented for our consideration is whether any of tbe jurors were induced to assent to the verdict by a resort to a determination of cbance, in violation of tbe provisions of subdivision 2, section 3292, Revised Statutes 1898. Tbat at least three of tbe jurors were induced to so assent to tbe verdict is evident from a perusal of tbe affidavits filed and considered at the hearing of the motion for a new trial. The material facts disclosed by these affidavits are almost identical with those in the case of Wright v. Railroad Co. 22 Utah 338, 62 Pac. 317, and, on the authority of that case, the one at bar must be reversed, with costs, and remanded to the court below, with directions to grant a new trial. It is so ordered.
Baslciri, J., concurs.