Poland v. McDowell
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Action of asumpsit to recover for alleged services rendered by plaintiff to defendant. Plea, general issue. Verdict for defendant. Plaintiff filed exceptions to one instruction of court in his charge to the jury, and after court had adjourned, counsel for plaintiff, without consent of Justice presiding, made up bill of exceptions and asked that the same be heard. Case stated in opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtSavage, C. J.
This case comes up on the plaintiff’s bill of exceptions. One exception was formally allowed by the presiding Justice, though it appears to have been done after the adjournment of the term. But as to that, the certificate of the presiding Justice that the exception was allowed is conclusive in this court of the regularity of the filing and allowance of the .exceptions. Dunn v. Auburn Motor Co., 92 Maine, 165. The exception allowed is thus stated in the bill. At the conclusion of the charge plaintiff’s counsel requested the following instruction. “You are to give due consideration to all…
2Cited by9 opinions
- State v. SmithSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1944
- Bradford v. DavisSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1947
- Thompson v. FranckusSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1954
- White v. SchofieldSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1957
- State v. JohnsonSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1950
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.