Abbott v. Wood
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Exceptions from the Western District Court, Goodenow J. presiding. This was an action under the statute for regulating fences, in which the plaintiffs claim to recover double the expense of “ amending, surveying and viewing the partition fence between the adjoining lands of the parties.”
Read the full summary
Exceptions from the Western District Court, Goodenow J. presiding. This was an action under the statute for regulating fences, in which the plaintiffs claim to recover double the expense of “ amending, surveying and viewing the partition fence between the adjoining lands of the parties.” It was admitted, that the parties were owners and occupiers of adjoining lands, and improved the same; and to prove that there had been a division of the partition fence between them, the plaintiffs offered in evidence, the records of the town of Rumford, upon which was found the following. “Whereas a dispute…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court, Shepley J. taking no part in the decision, not having been present at the argument, was drawn up by
Tenney J.
— To the maintenance of this action several objections have been urged, upon the evidence introduced and relied upon in its support. It is founded upon chapter 44 of the statutes of 1821; and being for a penalty as well as remedial, the statute must be strictly construed. Without con-' sidering all the points presented, we are satisfied, that the proof in two respects has failed of being such as the law requires.
Assuming the fact to be true, that a proper…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Grier v. Kansas City, Clay County & St. Joseph Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1921
- Reeves v. RossWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1907
- Flowing Wells Co. v. CulinArizona Supreme Court · 1908