Call v. Mitchell
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
ON Exceptions from Nisi Prius, Cutting, J., presiding, This was an. appeal from the judgment of a justice of the peace. The writ was returnable before one Bailey Feb. 21, 1853. On the return day, the justice being necessarily absent, the action was continued by Cyrus Cotter, Esq., another justice of the same county, to March 19, following.
Read the full summary
ON Exceptions from Nisi Prius, Cutting, J., presiding, This was an. appeal from the judgment of a justice of the peace. The writ was returnable before one Bailey Feb. 21, 1853. On the return day, the justice being necessarily absent, the action was continued by Cyrus Cotter, Esq., another justice of the same county, to March 19, following. When the time of adjournment had expired, Bailey being still necessarily absent, Cotter entered the action to be tried before himself, and continued the same to April 9, 1853, when the parties appeared, the general issue was pleaded and joined, a trial had,…
1Opinion of the CourtTenney, J.
— This action was brought, to be tried by-Elias Dailey, a justice of the peace, on Eeb. 21, 1853. On the return day of the writ, the justice was necessarily absent, and Gyrus Cotter, another justice of the peace for the same county, continued the action to March 19, 1853, at which time justice Bailey was again necessarily absent, and justice Cotter being otherwise engaged, continued the action to April 9, 1853. On the day last named the parties appeared, and the general issue was pleaded and joined, and upon a hearing, judgment was rendered for the defendant that he was not guilty and for his…
2Cited by2 opinions
- State v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1883
- Hamill v. ChamplinSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1878