Whittaker v. Sanford
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On motion and exceptions by defendant. This is an action on the -case -to recover damages for false imprisonment. The plaintiff claimed that the defendant held her under restraint on the barkentine “Kingdom” from May 10 to June 6, 1910, in such manner as to constitute false imprisonment. Plea, general issue.
Read the full summary
On motion and exceptions by defendant. This is an action on the -case -to recover damages for false imprisonment. The plaintiff claimed that the defendant held her under restraint on the barkentine “Kingdom” from May 10 to June 6, 1910, in such manner as to constitute false imprisonment. Plea, general issue. The jury rendered a verdict for the plaintiff for $1100. The -defendant filed a motion-for a new trial and excepted to certain rulings and refusals -to rule by the presiding Justice. . The case is stated in -the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtSavage, J.
'Action for false imprisonment. The plaintiff recovered a verdict for $1100. The case comes up on defendant’s exceptions and motion for a new trial.
The case shows that for several years prior -to 1910, at a locality called “Shiloh” in Durham in this State there had been gathered together a religious sect, of which the defendant was at least the religious leader. They dwelt in a so called colony. There was a similar' colony under the same religious leadership at Jaffa, in Syria. The plaintiff was a member of -this sect, and her husband *79was one of its ministers. For the promotion of the work of…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Strock v. PressnellOhio Supreme Court · 1988
- F.G. v. MacDonellSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1997
- Helstrom v. North Slope BoroughAlaska Supreme Court · 1990
- Hepworth v. Covey Bros. Amusement Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1939
- McCann v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2000
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.