Nesmith v. Bowen Development

In Nesmith v. Bowen Development, 564 So.2d 974 (Ala. Civ. App. 1990) the jury foreman visited the scene of the accident and reported to the jury what he saw as well as the conclusions he reached during their deliberations. He testified to these actions at the hearing on motion for new trial. The Alabama court found that it was error for the trial court to deny the motion for new trial because there was a "... distinct possibility that the conclusions he reached as a result of his actions were different from those he would have reached based on the evidence presented at trial." Id. at 975.