Humphries v. Parker
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On Motion and Exceptions from Nisi Prius, Kent, J., presiding. Case for malicious prosecution and slander. The facts sufficiently appear in the opinion of the Court. Verdict for the plaintiffs for $1400.
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was drawn by
Walton, J.
In examining and deciding upon a bill of exceptions, we must act upon the presumption that it presents the rulings of the presiding Judge correctly. And yet, every one knows, that they are prepared and allowed under circumstances not very well calculated to secure accuracy. They are drawn in the first instance by the losing party, and it is for his interest to make it appear that the presiding Judge has committed some error. The other party interferes and endeavors to have the exceptions so amended as to exclude all appearance of error. They are…
2Cited by19 opinions
- Davis v. HearstCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
- Buckley v. KnappSupreme Court of Missouri · 1871
- Coleman v. AllenSupreme Court of Georgia · 1888
- Barkly v. CopelandCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
- Stansbury v. FogleCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1873
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.