City of Portland v. Richardson
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On Report. Case to recover amouut paid out by the plaintiffs on a judgment recovered against them by one Partridge. These defendants were verbally notified of the peudency of the former suit, and were present as witnesses and otherwise aiding at the trial of the former suit. The excavation was made in the sidewalk on Silver street, in front of the defendants’ buildings.
1Opinion of the Court
ApuletoN, G. J.'
It is in proof, feat one Joseph G. Partridge recovered judgment against the city of Portland for a defect in one of its highways, the defect being an excavation therein made by these defendants without authority — .that they were notified of the pendency of said suit and were present at the trial. They are concluded by the judgment, as far as parties are ever concluded, by such notice and judgment.
In the suit against the plaintiffs the jury must have found, that the excavation was a defect, that it was the cause of the injury to Partridge, that it was not properly guarded and…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Congreve v. . SmithNew York Court of Appeals · 1858
- Congreve v. . MorganNew York Court of Appeals · 1858
3Cited by10 opinions
- City of Independence v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1901
- Edinger & Co. v. Southwestern Surety InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1918
- Maryland Casualty Co. of Baltimore v. SturgisSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1939
- City of Bloomington v. RoushAppellate Court of Illinois · 1883
- Leman v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1907
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.