Case Name: Barbara Sites v. Casper Haverstick and others
Court: Supreme Court of Ohio
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1873-12
Citations: 23 Ohio St. 626
Docket Number: 
Parties: Barbara Sites v. Casper Haverstick and others.
Judges: 
Reporter: Ohio State Reports, New Service
Volume: 23
Pages: 626–627

Head Matter:
Barbara Sites v. Casper Haverstick and others.
1. Where the jury, by their verdict, “ find the issues joined in the cause ” in favor of one of the parties, this is to be taken as a verdict finding each and all of the issues therein for such party.
2. In such case, if the issues are such that a finding of either of them in favor of the successful party entitles him to the judgment rendered, the judgment will not be reversed for error in the instructions of the court relating exclusively to the other.
Error to the District Court of Columbiana county.
This was an action to recover possession of real estate. The plaintiff claimed title by descent, and issue was taken as to the validity of a marriage, by which her title was sought to be defeated. The defendants claimed that the plaintiff had released her title to them, and issue was also "taken as to whether the deed of release had been obtained ¡by fraud. These two were the only issues in the case. The jury, by their verdict, “ found the issues joined in the cause” in favor of the defendants, and judgment was entered accordingly. The plaintiff now seeks to reverse the judgment, on the ground that the court erred in its instruction to the jury touching the validity of the marriage in question.
John W. Morrison and M. D. Stallcup, for the plaintiff in error.
J. H. Wallace, for defendant in error:
Under the verdict the third defense is established, and hence errors in the charge as to the other issues worked no injury. Harman v. Kelly, 14 Ohio, 502; Kugler v. Wiseman, 20 Ohio, 361; Ohio L. I. & T. Co. v. Goodin, 10 Ohio St. 557; Portage Co. Bank v. Lane, 8 Ohio St. 405.

Opinion:
By the Court.
By the verdict of the jury we .must understand that both issues were found in favor of defendants. The jury therefore found that a valid deed of release had been executed by plaintiff to the defendants. It is immaterial, therefore, to inquire whether the court erred in its instructions touching the marriage, as those instructions could in no wise affect the result of the ease or prejudice the plaintiff.
Judgment affirmed.