Ipswitch v. Fernandez

Citations

• 84 Cal. 639
• 24 P. 298
• 1890 Cal. LEXIS 856

Syllabus

<p>Appeal — Conflicting Evidence. — When the evidence is substantially conflicting, the supreme court cannot disturb the verdict of the jury or an order denying a new trial, on the ground that it was against the evidence.</p> <p>New Trial — Intoxication of Juror — Statement of Fact in Opinion of JUDGE. — It seems that a statement' of fact as to the intoxication of a juror, made by a judge in passing upon a motion for a new trial, cannot be regarded as establishing the fact, when the evidence is conflicting in relation thereto, and preponderates against the fact; hut if such statement discloses that the intoxication was patent to all parties, an order denying a new trial will, at all events, be affirmed.</p> <p>Id. —Estoppel of Losing Party as to Known Intoxication of Juror.</p> <p>—If the intoxication of a juror, which is urged as a ground of new trial, is shown to have continued from the beginning of the trial to its close, and was apparent to the losing party, he could not keep quiet on the subject, and take the chances of a favorable verdict, and then avail himself of it for the first time after his defeat.</p>