Ames v. Vose

71 Me. 17, 1879 Me. LEXIS 199
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine·Decided July 30, 1879·Published

Opinion

WaltoN, J.

Assumpsit to recover compensation for hauling and driving logs.' The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiffs for $1140.97. The defendants claim a new trial, first, for misdirection of the presiding judge, secondly, upon the ground that the verdict is against evidence, and, thirdly, for newly discovered evidence. The misdirection complained of was a statement of the familiar and well settled rule of law that, when the parties have agreed upon a surveyor to scale logs, they will, in the absence of fraud or mathematical mistake, be bound by his scale. The ruling was correct. The court is of opinion that the verdict is not against evidence; certainly not so clearly against evidence as to justify setting it aside. The newly discovered evidence is the statement of a teamster that he counted the logs daily, and that the whole number was 7206. The scaler made them 7291 — eighty-five logs more than the teamster. No reason is perceived why this evidence, by the use of due diligence, might not have been discovered before the trial as well as after.

Exceptions and motions oveiTuled.

Judgment on the verdict.

AppletoN, C. J., Barrows, DaNforth, Peters and Libbey, JJ., concurred.

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

Ames v. Vose, 71 Me. 17, 1879 Me. LEXIS 199 (Me. 1879).

71 Me. 17 (Ames v. Vose) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.