Blodgett v. Dow
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On report, from tbe superior court for Kennebec county. Tbe law court, were to render such decision as tbe law and admissible testimony require. This was an action against tbe administrator of tbe estate of William Rollins, deceased, under tbe provisions of R. S., c. 66, §§ 18 and 14, on an appeal, by tbe plaintiffs, from tbe report of commissioners on said estate represented insolvent.
Read the full summary
On report, from tbe superior court for Kennebec county. Tbe law court, were to render such decision as tbe law and admissible testimony require. This was an action against tbe administrator of tbe estate of William Rollins, deceased, under tbe provisions of R. S., c. 66, §§ 18 and 14, on an appeal, by tbe plaintiffs, from tbe report of commissioners on said estate represented insolvent. Tbe claim, which was not allowed, was a promissory note of tbe intestate, described in the opinion of tbe court. Tbe defendant pleaded tbe general issue and a brief statement by way of further defense, “that…
1Opinion of the CourtLibbey, J.
The plaintiffs seek to recover in this action on a promissory note given by William Rollins, the defendant’s intestate, to one Ellen P. Blodgett, or order, dated June 19, 1876, for 11000, payable in three years with interest, and by said Blodgett duly indorsed.
The note was seasonably presented to the commissioners in said Rollins estate, disallowed by them, and appeal taken by the plaintiffs.
No question is made as to the rights of the plaintiffs to recover, if the right of action is not barred by the judgment relied on in defense.
February 24, 1880, the plaintiffs commenced an action against…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Cromwell v. County of SacSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Campbell v. RankinSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
3Cited by1 opinion
- Maine Lumber Products Corp. v. StephensDistrict Court, D. Maine · 1952