This page within Virginia Tort Case Law is a compilation of cases on jury impeachment reported by the Virginia Supreme Court and summarized by Brien Roche dealing with the topic of Jury Impeachment. For more information about juries see the pages on Wikipedia.
Jury Impeachment-Cases
1987 Caterpillar Tractor Co. v. Hulvey, 233 Va. 77, 353 S.E.2d 747.
Virginia has adhered strictly to rule that testimony of jurors should not be received for jury impeachment especially on grounds of their own misconduct. There is exception to this rule where such testimony might be admissible to prevent miscarriage of justice. In this case, evidence disclosed situation where two jurors were influenced by opinions of third, dominant juror who was attorney, a status which may have rendered him exempt from jury service but not incompetent to serve. Such circumstances do not justify nullification of verdict.
1971 Oyler v. Ramsey, 211 Va. 564, 179 S.E.2d 904.
Defendant complains, after verdict, that juror and plaintiff’s counsel improperly stood silent when prospective jurors were asked about business relations. Since no objection was made before jury was sworn, it is incumbent upon defendant to show that he was injured by alleged irregularity. Not error to refuse to grant new trial.
1958 Phillips v. Campbell, 200 Va. 136, 104 S.E.2d 765.
Statements, affidavits or testimony of jurors should not be received to impeach their verdict other than in exceptional cases and to prevent miscarriage of justice. Jurors not allowed to impeach their verdict by testifying to their assumption defendant was insured and effect that had on their verdict.
1956 Dozier v. Morrisette, 198 Va. 37, 92 S.E.2d 366.
General rule is that testimony of jurors is inadmissible to impeach verdict. However, private communications, possibly prejudicial, between jurors and third parties invalidate verdict unless their harmlessness is made to appear.
1952 Hebner v. Sullivan, 194 Va. 259, 72 S.E.2d 689.
Where jury verdict speaks for itself, questions raised by jury during deliberations should not be allowed to contradict verdict.
