Briggs v. Grand Trunk Railway Co.

54 Me. 375
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine·Decided July 1, 1867·Published

Opinion

Kent, J.

The objection to the declaration,, as stated in argument, is, that it is bad for duplicity. It may be so, but the demurrer is general and not special. According to long established rules of pleading, duplicity can only be taken advantage of on special demurrer, pointing out the objection and the grounds of it. Scott v. Whipple, 6 Greenlief, 425. Otis v. Blake, 6 Mass., 336. Commonwealth [376] v. Tuck, 20 Pick., 361; 1 Chitty Pleadings, 512; 2 Johns., 433; 20 Johns., 404. Exceptions sustained.

Demurrer overruled.

AppletoN, C. J., WaltoN, Dickerson, Barrows and Tapley, JJ., concurred.

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

Briggs v. Grand Trunk Railway Co., 54 Me. 375 (Me. 1867).

54 Me. 375 (Briggs v. Grand Trunk Railway Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Currie v. Henry
2 Johns. 433 (New York Supreme Court, 1807)
Bradner v. Demick
20 Johns. 404 (New York Supreme Court, 1823)
Otis v. Blake
6 Mass. 336 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1810)