Allen v. Lawrence

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Allen v. Lawrence

64 Me. 175

DecidedJuly 1, 1874

StatusPublished

This text of 64 Me. 175 (Allen v. Lawrence) 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

Allen v. Lawrence, 64 Me. 175 (Me. 1874).

Pincite

Opinion

Walton, J.

All unnecessary prolixity should be avoided in bills of exceptions; but they must contain enough to show wherein the excepting party is aggrieved, or they cannot be sustained. They cannot be added to, or supplemented, by the statements of counsel made at the argument before the law court. They must contain enough within themselves to show error, or they will be overruled. No error is apparent in this case. The bill of excep[177]*177tions contains absolutely nothing but an extract from the judge’s charge. It is claimed in argument that this portion of the charge was inapplicable to the issues of fact actually litigated. This may be true. But as the bill of exceptions does not state what those issues were, it is impossible for the court to determine whether the complaint is well founded or not. No such error is apparent upon the face of the record. The exceptions must therefore be overruled; for error must be made to appear, it cannot be presumed. Exceptions overruled.

Appleton, C. J., Cutting, Barrows, Danfobth and Peters, JJ., concurred.

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

Walton, J.

All unnecessary prolixity should be avoided in bills of exceptions; but they must contain enough to show wherein the excepting party is aggrieved, or they cannot be sustained. They cannot be added to, or supplemented, by the statements of counsel made at the argument before the law court. They must contain enough within themselves to show error, or they will be overruled. No error is apparent in this case. The bill of excep[177]*177tions contains absolutely nothing but an extract from the judge’s charge. It is claimed in argument that this portion of the charge was inapplicable to the issues of fact actually litigated. This may be true. But as the bill of exceptions does not state what those issues were, it is impossible for the court to determine whether the complaint is well founded or not. No such error is apparent upon the face of the record. The exceptions must therefore be overruled; for error must be made to appear, it cannot be presumed. Exceptions overruled.

Appleton, C. J., Cutting, Barrows, Danfobth and Peters, JJ., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

64 Me. 175, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/allen-v-lawrence-me-1874.