Ham v. City of Lewiston
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On Motion and Exceptions by Dependant. The case appears in the opinion. The court should not have left the question of what the aider-man had notice of under the admission to the jury; but should have instructed them as a matter of law, the facts being admitted. When the facts in a case are found by uncontradicted and unquestioned testimony, or by agreement, or by special verdict, their legal effect is a matter of law to be determined by the court.
Read the full summary
On Motion and Exceptions by Dependant. The case appears in the opinion. The court should not have left the question of what the aider-man had notice of under the admission to the jury; but should have instructed them as a matter of law, the facts being admitted. When the facts in a case are found by uncontradicted and unquestioned testimony, or by agreement, or by special verdict, their legal effect is a matter of law to be determined by the court. Todd v. Whitney, 27 Maine, 480; Witham v. Portland, 72 Maine, 539. The verdict is against- the evidence, — the weight of evidence showing that the…
1Opinion of the CourtFogler, J.
The plaintiff brings this action to recover damages for personal injuries caused by an alleged defect in Main street in the city of Lewiston. The verdict was for the plaintiff and the defendant brings the case here upon a motion for new trial and *267upon exceptions to instructions given to the j ury by the presiding justice.
At the time when the accident occurred to the plaintiff there was standing, and had been standing for several weeks within the limits of Main street, and opposite a building in process of erection, a portable steam engine and boiler used for hoisting materials for the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Muse v. PageSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1939
- Garbanati v. City of DurangoSupreme Court of Colorado · 1902