Legal Opinion

Palmer v. Penobscot Lumbering Ass'n

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided April 15, 1897PublishedCited by 4 opinions

On Motion and Exceptions by Defendants. Tliis was an action to recover damages for negligence in the management of the plaintiff’s logs which came into the Penobscot Boom in the spring of 1893. The plaintiff in his writ set out four separate claims, in substance, as follows: First, — That the defendant company neglected to have its booms in proper condition and neglected to care for his logs so that the logs escaped, went down the river and were lost; be claims the loss of…

Read the full summary

On Motion and Exceptions by Defendants. Tliis was an action to recover damages for negligence in the management of the plaintiff’s logs which came into the Penobscot Boom in the spring of 1893. The plaintiff in his writ set out four separate claims, in substance, as follows: First, — That the defendant company neglected to have its booms in proper condition and neglected to care for his logs so that the logs escaped, went down the river and were lost; be claims the loss of about 460,000 feet of logs of value of about $4,000. Second, — That by reason of such negligence about 72,000 feet…

1Opinion of the CourtWhitehouse, J.

In this case the jury returned special findings that the defendant corporation failed to exercise reasonable diligence in rafting and delivering the plaintiff’s logs in the spring and summer of 1893, and that by reason of the defendant’s negligence in that respect, the plaintiff sustained damages in the sum of $2899.02. The case comes to this court on exceptions and a motion to set aside the verdict as against evidence.

In the first place, the defendant excepts to the ruling of the presiding justice admitting in evidence the letter of F. W. Ayer, one of the directors of the defendant…

2Cited by4 opinions

  1. People v. SchwarzCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1926
  2. Estate of RyersonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1941
  3. Clark v. Commercial Trust Co. of N.J.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1935
  4. Urciolo v. SachsDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1948

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API