Crooker v. Randall

53 Me. 355
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine·Decided July 1, 1865·Published

Opinion

Dickerson, J.

The facts admitted by the demurrer [356]*356would not authorize the rejection of the report of the referee; a fortiori, the Court will not grant a review. The "mistake” alleged was the fault of the petitioner’s counsel,- which the Court will not cure.

It does not appear that the newly discovered evidence is admissible, or that it is not cumulative; nor is the Court furnished with the whole evidence before the referee, to enable it to determine whéther the evidence is cumulative.

Exceptions overruled.

Appleton, C. J., Cutting, Walton and Danforth, JJ., concurred.

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

Crooker v. Randall, 53 Me. 355 (Me. 1865).

53 Me. 355 (Crooker v. Randall) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.