
    Richards v. Richards.
    1. Practice — Affidavits of Jurors to Impeach Verdict.
    Neither affidavit, deposition or other sworn statement of a juror is admissible to impeach the verdict, except as provided in subdivision 2 of sec. 17, of the Code; — much less should the unsworn statement of a juror be taken for that purpose.
    2. Presumption in Pavor of Verdict.
    The court below having instructed the jury fully upon the matter of a counterclaim, it is to be presumed that it was considered by them in making up their verdict.
    
      Appeal from the County Court of Arapahoe County.
    
    This action was originally brought before a justice of the peace to recover for services rendered. There are no written pleadings. Upon an appeal to the county court the case was tried to a jury and resulted in a verdict and judgment in favor of plaintiff for the sum of $153.55. Defendant brings the case here on appeal.
    Mr. John H. Gabriel, for appellant.
    Mr. Geo. C. Norris and Mr. E. B. Kellogg, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Goddard

delivered the opinion of the court.

Numerous errors are assigned, but counsel for appellant discusses but one, and that is alleged misconduct on the part of the jury in this: that they failed to consider the counterclaim interposed by defendant. Such misconduct is attempted to be shown by affidavit of counsel of statements made by one of the jurymen to the effect that they did not entertain this question. The affidavit is inadmissible. It is well settled that no affidavit, deposition or other sworn statement of a juror will be received to impeach the verdict, except as provided in subdivision 2 of section 217, Code of 1887; — much less should the unsworn statement of a juror be taken for that purpose.

The court below instructed the jury fully upon the matter of the counterclaim, and it is to be presumed that it was considered by them in making up their verdict. A careful reading of the testimony introduced fails to disclose any satisfactory evidence to support the alleged counterclaim, and for this reason the jury might well have found against the defendant upon this issue.

This being the only objection urged before us, and it being without merit, the judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.  