Bridges v. Patterson

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Bridges v. Patterson

96 A. 142, 114 Me. 549, 1915 Me. LEXIS 65

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine·Decided December 28, 1915·Published

Opinion

Action of assumpsit to recover balance alleged to be due on sale of a certain quantity of fish. The verdict was for the plaintiff and the case is before this court on the usual motion for a new trial. There is no controversy concerning the law involved in the case. The issue was solely one of fact and it is the opinion of the court that the verdict of the jury was not so manifestly wrong as to warrant us in disturbing it.

Accordingly the entry must be motion overruled.

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

Action of assumpsit to recover balance alleged to be due on sale of a certain quantity of fish. The verdict was for the plaintiff and the case is before this court on the usual motion for a new trial. There is no controversy concerning the law involved in the case. The issue was solely one of fact and it is the opinion of the court that the verdict of the jury was not so manifestly wrong as to warrant us in disturbing it.

Accordingly the entry must be motion overruled.

Bridges v. Patterson, 96 A. 142, 114 Me. 549, 1915 Me. LEXIS 65 (Me. 1915).

Pincite

96 A. 142 (Bridges v. Patterson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.