Alfred Shrimpton & Sons, Ltd. v. Pendexter

34 A. 417, 88 Me. 556, 1896 Me. LEXIS 51
CourtSupreme Judicial Court of Maine
DecidedMarch 2, 1896
StatusPublished

This text of 34 A. 417 (Alfred Shrimpton & Sons, Ltd. v. Pendexter) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Judicial Court of Maine primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Alfred Shrimpton & Sons, Ltd. v. Pendexter, 34 A. 417, 88 Me. 556, 1896 Me. LEXIS 51 (Me. 1896).

Opinion

Foster, J.

Assumpsit on an account annexed for goods sold and delivered.

[563]*563The case was heard by the presiding justice with right of exceptions.

Judgment being for the full amount sued for, the defendant excepts, "because the judge erred in his construction and interpretation of the evidence.”

The exceptions challenge the correctness of the decision of the presiding justice based upon the result of evidence and matters of fact.

The principle is too familiar and too firmly established to need the citation of authorities, that the decision of a presiding; judge as to matters of fact, in a case referred to him with right of exceptions, is conclusive. Pettengill v. Shoenbar, 84 Maine, 104; Berry v. Johnson, 53 Maine, 401; McCarthy v. Mansfield, 56 Maine, 538; Haskell v. Hervey, 74 Maine, 192, as to the effect of testimony; Edmundson v. Bric, 136 Mass. 189; Coolidge v. Smith, 129 Mass. 554, 557. And in such case exceptions do not lie to his finding of any matter of fact. Curtis v. Downes, 56 Maine, 24.

Exceptions overruled,.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Coolidge v. Smith
129 Mass. 554 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1880)
Edmundson v. Bric
136 Mass. 189 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1883)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
34 A. 417, 88 Me. 556, 1896 Me. LEXIS 51, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alfred-shrimpton-sons-ltd-v-pendexter-me-1896.