Burke v. McDonald

Citations

• 3 Idaho 296
• 29 P. 98
• 1892 Ida. LEXIS 12

Syllabus

<p>'Jurors- — Challenges for Cause and Peremptory — Improper Conduct — Instructions—Location of Mining Claim — Party does not Lose Peremptory Challenge when Discovered Juror was Incompetent. — 1. A juror who is incompetent under the statute swears falsely upon examination on his voir dire, and thereby compels the plaintiff to exhaust one of his peremptory challenges, to exclude him, and before the jury is completed plaintiff discovers that said juror was incompetent, and offers to make proof thereof, he should be permitted to do so, and upon satisfactory proof being made, his peremptory challenge should be restored to him.</p> <p>Improper Conduct Ground for Reversal. — 2. A judgment in favor, of a party guilty of improper conduct calculated to influence the jury or any member thereof, in his favor, in rendering the verdict, should be reversed and a new trial granted on the ground of public policy.</p> <p>Location of Mining Claim. — 3. “A valid location of a mining claim may be made whenever the prospector has discovered such indications' of mineral that he is willing to spend his time and money in following with the expectation of finding ore,” is a proper instruction, and changing the word \willing” to \justified” radically changes the instruction, and is an improper modification.</p> <p>Date of Discovery of Claim. — Í. Where a discovery is made by a prospector of such a character as to entitle the prospector to make a valid location on the 16th day of September, and he sets his discovery stake on that day, partially stakes and marks his claim on the 17th, and completes his staking and marking of boundaries according to law on the 18th, his discovery and location will date from the sixteenth day of September.</p> <p>(Syllabus by the court.)</p>