Buxton v. Hamblen

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Buxton v. Hamblen

32 Me. 448

CourtSupreme Judicial Court of Maine

DecidedApril 15, 1851

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 32 Me. 448 (Buxton v. Hamblen) 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

Buxton v. Hamblen, 32 Me. 448 (Me. 1851).

Pincite

Opinion

Wells, J.,

orally.—The sale of pressed hay unbranded, is a violation of the statute, and equally so, whether to be visited by a forfeiture of the article or by a pecuniary penalty. The statute though not in express terms, yet by unavoidable inference, prohibits every such sale.

This is a suit brought to recover against the defendant for not completing a sale, prohibited by law. Such a suit can never be maintained. Nonsuit confirmed.

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

Wells, J.,

orally.—The sale of pressed hay unbranded, is a violation of the statute, and equally so, whether to be visited by a forfeiture of the article or by a pecuniary penalty. The statute though not in express terms, yet by unavoidable inference, prohibits every such sale.

This is a suit brought to recover against the defendant for not completing a sale, prohibited by law. Such a suit can never be maintained. Nonsuit confirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

32 Me. 448, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/buxton-v-hamblen-me-1851.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack