Court Opinion

ID: 9563665
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 18:44:22.787997+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:17:59.975604
License: Public Domain

Rosellini, J.
(dissenting) — The affidavits upon which the motion for new trial was presented were in conflict as to the amount of surveillance or shadowing of the juror which occurred. The trial court found it négligible because the primary purpose of the detective was to observe the plaintiff’s actions. But in my opinion, the courts should never give their sanction to even the slightest degree of such tampering, which is contrary to our basic concept of a jury composed of men as free as possible from prejudice and protected from improper influence of the parties. For this reason, even though no harm came to the plaintiffs as a result of the incidental surveillance which occurred in this case, I think the stamp of severe judicial disapproval should be placed upon it and a new trial granted.