Bucknam v. Greenleaf

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Bucknam v. Greenleaf

48 Me. 394

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine·Decided July 1, 1861·Published

Opinions

By the Court.

The verdict, as found by the jury, has never been affirmed. [396]*396The affirmation was of the erroneous verdict. According to the authorities, the exceptions must be sustained. The defendant, on his motion, is entitled to have the verdict set aside. Snell v. Bangor Navigation Co., 30 Maine, 337; Withee v. Rowe, 45 Maine, 571.

Tenney, C. J., Appleton, Cutting, May and Davis, JJ., concurred.

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

By the Court.

The verdict, as found by the jury, has never been affirmed. [396]*396The affirmation was of the erroneous verdict. According to the authorities, the exceptions must be sustained. The defendant, on his motion, is entitled to have the verdict set aside. Snell v. Bangor Navigation Co., 30 Maine, 337; Withee v. Rowe, 45 Maine, 571.

Tenney, C. J., Appleton, Cutting, May and Davis, JJ., concurred.

Bucknam v. Greenleaf, 48 Me. 394 (Me. 1861).

Pincite

48 Me. 394 (Bucknam v. Greenleaf) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.