Legal Opinion

Nadeau v. Caribou Water, Light & Power Co.

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided November 20, 1919PublishedCited by 10 opinions

Action on the caseto recover damages for injuries sustained by plaintiff through the alleged negligence of defendant company. Defendant company filed plea of general issue. Verdict for plaintiff in the sum of $2412.50. Defendant filed motion for new trial also exceptions to certain rulings of presiding Justice. Motion overruled. Exceptions overruled. Hanson, J., Dunn, J., Wilson, J., Concur.

Read the full summary

Action on the caseto recover damages for injuries sustained by plaintiff through the alleged negligence of defendant company. Defendant company filed plea of general issue. Verdict for plaintiff in the sum of $2412.50. Defendant filed motion for new trial also exceptions to certain rulings of presiding Justice. Motion overruled. Exceptions overruled. Hanson, J., Dunn, J., Wilson, J., Concur. Morrill, J., concurs in the result in an opinion holding that there was no error in the ruling and refusal to rule of the presiding Justice. CorNish, C. J., concurs in the latter opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtDeasy, J.

The plaintiff, an employee of the defendant, brought an action for personal injuries alleged to have been caused by the defendant’s negligence. The declaration was in common law form, setting forth the plaintiff’s due care. The defendant seasonably requested the presiding Justice to give the following instructions to the jury:

"I. The burden of proof is on the Plaintiff to show that he was himself free from contributory negligence and he cannot recover in this action unless he was free from th'e contributory negligence.

II. If the Plaintiff would preclude the Defendant from making the defense…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Way v. GreerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907
  2. Salvuca v. Ryan & Reilly Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1916
  3. Dugan v. Blue Hill Street Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907
  4. Hodges v. Swastika Oil Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1916
  5. Pantall v. Rochester & Pittsburg Coal & Iron Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1902

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Roberts v. American Chain & Cable Co.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1969
  2. People v. BroadCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
  3. Hammett v. Vogue, Inc.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1942
  4. Nelson v. StukeyMontana Supreme Court · 1931
  5. Peterson v. SorensenUtah Supreme Court · 1937

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API