in both cases, without stating in which case or separating the damages in the two cases " We the Jury find for the Plaintiffs and assess the damages at Fifteen hundred Dollars which includes both cases"
Defendants Counsel immediately moved for a new trial, the verdict was recorded and the Jury discharged and the Court adjourned to March 4. 1845.
March 4 1845 Plaintiffs Counsel in the opening of the Court moved the Court to recall the Jury to amend the verdict by apportioning the damages in each case separately but the motion was defined by the Court on account of the absence of defendants Counsel, March 5 1845 defendants Counsel filed their reason for a new trial is follows
Leon Superior Court
John Miller et al Defts
The Hoc's Plffs
Defendants move for a new trial and also in arrest of Judgment on the following grounds.
1 Because in the writ and declaration the damages claimed are but $ whereas the Verdicts is for $205 damages
2 Because the declaration and assignment of breaches upon which said Verdict is rendered eras and is defective irregular and insufficient
3 Because the Verdict is irregular and illegal inasmuch as the Jury in this case and which tried it & No 358 between the same parties by consent at the same time on the 1[st] of March 1845 rendered a verdict in open Court for $ 1500 damages in both cases without assessing