Briggs v. Grand Trunk Railway Co.

54 Me. 375
CourtSupreme Judicial Court of Maine
DecidedJuly 1, 1867
StatusPublished

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

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]*376v. 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

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)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
54 Me. 375, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/briggs-v-grand-trunk-railway-co-me-1867.