Bruce v. Sidelinger

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Bruce v. Sidelinger

19 A. 824, 82 Me. 318, 1890 Me. LEXIS 37

DecidedFebruary 11, 1890

StatusPublished

This text of 19 A. 824 (Bruce v. Sidelinger) 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

Bruce v. Sidelinger, 19 A. 824, 82 Me. 318, 1890 Me. LEXIS 37 (Me. 1890).

Pincite

Opinion

Peters, C. J.

The.plaintiff sued for his services in peeling bark, cutting logs, and hauling the bark and logs to a place of delivery. He was to be paid by the cord for peeling and hauling the- bark, and by the thousands of feet for the work on the lum[319]*319ber. He was allowed to testify to a measurement of the bark and a survey of the lumber made by himself. The defendant contends that the quantities should have been proved by a sworn surveyor, or by the certificate of a sworn surveyor. That cannot be. The statute which requires sworn officers to make surveys and measurements, distinctly and in terms relates to sales only. Work upon lumber is a very different thing from a sale of lumber. The construction which the defendant invokes would be impracticable in its operation.

Exceptions overruled.

Walton, Virgin, Emery, Foster and Haskell, JJ., concurred.

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

Peters, C. J.

The.plaintiff sued for his services in peeling bark, cutting logs, and hauling the bark and logs to a place of delivery. He was to be paid by the cord for peeling and hauling the- bark, and by the thousands of feet for the work on the lum[319]*319ber. He was allowed to testify to a measurement of the bark and a survey of the lumber made by himself. The defendant contends that the quantities should have been proved by a sworn surveyor, or by the certificate of a sworn surveyor. That cannot be. The statute which requires sworn officers to make surveys and measurements, distinctly and in terms relates to sales only. Work upon lumber is a very different thing from a sale of lumber. The construction which the defendant invokes would be impracticable in its operation.

Exceptions overruled.

Walton, Virgin, Emery, Foster and Haskell, JJ., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

19 A. 824, 82 Me. 318, 1890 Me. LEXIS 37, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bruce-v-sidelinger-me-1890.