
    (Seventh Circuit — Guernsey County, O., Circuit Court
    Dec. Term, 1892.)
    Beesbe Lattbie, Fbazieb and Woodbtjby, JJ.
    Roland C. Parker v. Geo. H. Blackwelder.
    
      Misconduct of Jury — Proof—Affidavits of jurors not admissible after verdict to impeach same unless evidence aliunde is first offered — The affidavit of one of the attorneys in the ease, as to statements ofjmors to him, not such evidence dlkmde as ■ to make affidavits of jwrors themselves as to the same fads admissible.
    
    Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Guernsey County.
    In the court of common pleas Blackwelder sued Parker upon some notes. The ease was tried to a jury, verdiet was rendered for Blackwelder for the full amount claimed, and judgment was entered upon the ve-rdiet. Parker moved for a new trial upon the'ground of misconduct of the jury, and supported this with the affidavits of three jurors, and that of his attorney. The affidavits of the three jurors disclosed that the jury retired for deliberation on Saturday ; that on Saturday evening, by consent of counsel, they were permitted to separate until Monday morning; that at that time they stood six to six upon the issues joined; that on Monday morning when they re-assembled, it was represented in the jury room by one or more of their number to those who voted for the defendant below that the defendant below -was insolvent, and that a verdiet against bim would not hurt him; that these three believed this to be érue, and accordingly voted for the plaintiff below. The affidavit of the attorney simply disclosed what one of these three jurors, who himself also filed an affidavit, had told the attorney, after verdiet, of the matters above stated. The court of common pleas overruled the motion.
   Wood buey, J.

The common pleas did not err. Affidavits .pf jurors cannot be received after verdict to impeaoh tbe same unless evidence aliunde is first offered»; and the. affidavit of the attorney did not constitute such a showing aliunde, because it simply con^ tallied a statement at' second hand of what the juror himself testified to in his own affidavit, and the juror’s affidavit itself being incompetent, secondary proof of its statements would be likewise incompetent. Tbe court cited Hulet v. Barnett, 10 Ohio, 460; Farrer v. State, 2 Ohio St. 54; Kent v. State, 42 Ohio St. 426.

B. W. Anderson, for Parker..

Bred. L. Bosemond, contra.  