Bangor Boom Corp. v. Whiting
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Assumpsit on account annexed. General issue pleaded. The plaintiffs were chartered with authority to boom lumber and receive toll therefor, at the rate of 38 cents per thousand feet. This action was for driving and booming logs. The defendants objected that the driving of lumber was not authorized by the plaintiffs’ charter. This objection was sustained by the Court, Wells, J. The plaintiffs then moved to withdraw the charge for driving.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit on account annexed. General issue pleaded. The plaintiffs were chartered with authority to boom lumber and receive toll therefor, at the rate of 38 cents per thousand feet. This action was for driving and booming logs. The defendants objected that the driving of lumber was not authorized by the plaintiffs’ charter. This objection was sustained by the Court, Wells, J. The plaintiffs then moved to withdraw the charge for driving. This was allowed and was done, although objected to by the defendants. The following facts were proved. The plaintiffs, by their agent, Moody, drove and…
1Opinion of the CourtSheplev, J.
The action was assumpsit on an account annexed to the writ for driving, booming, rafting and delivering “ certain mill logs and lumber.” A verdict was found in favor of the corporation, and the case is presented on a report for the consideration of several objections, taken by the counsel for the defendants to the rulings and instructions of the Court.
1. The first is, that an amendment was allowed to be made by erasing the word “ driving.” It is said this changed the form of action. The declaration t contains no count on a special agreement; the effect was only to diminish the claim by…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Northwestern Improvement & Boom Co. v. O'BrienSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1899
- Downing v. Mount Washington Road Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1860
- Bath Gas Light Co. v. . ClaffyNew York Court of Appeals · 1896
- Lauten v. RowanSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1879