Doyle v. Maine Shore Line Railroad

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Doyle v. Maine Shore Line Railroad

13 A. 275, 80 Me. 136, 1888 Me. LEXIS 22

DecidedFebruary 1, 1888

StatusPublished

This text of 13 A. 275 (Doyle v. Maine Shore Line Railroad) 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

Doyle v. Maine Shore Line Railroad, 13 A. 275, 80 Me. 136, 1888 Me. LEXIS 22 (Me. 1888).

Pincite

Opinion

Walton, J.

Proceedings to ascertain the damage done to the plaintiff’s land by the location of the defendants’ railroad across it. The jury assessed the damage at one thousand two hundred and eighty-seven dollars and twenty-eight cents. The defendants claim that this amount is excessive,, and move to have the verdict set aside and a new trial granted. We do not think the motion can be sustained. The evidence is uncontradicted, and, if believed, justifies the verdict. The witnesses were unimpeached, and they appear to have been respectable and experienced men. One of them had been for several years an assessor of Ellsworth, and was at the time of testifying its treasurer. We do not think it is within the province of the court to say that the jury acted corruptly, or perversely or erroneously, in relying upon the unconlradioted testimony of such witnesses.

Motion overruled.

Peters, C. J., Virgin, Libbey, Foster and Haskell, JJ., concurred.

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

Walton, J.

Proceedings to ascertain the damage done to the plaintiff’s land by the location of the defendants’ railroad across it. The jury assessed the damage at one thousand two hundred and eighty-seven dollars and twenty-eight cents. The defendants claim that this amount is excessive,, and move to have the verdict set aside and a new trial granted. We do not think the motion can be sustained. The evidence is uncontradicted, and, if believed, justifies the verdict. The witnesses were unimpeached, and they appear to have been respectable and experienced men. One of them had been for several years an assessor of Ellsworth, and was at the time of testifying its treasurer. We do not think it is within the province of the court to say that the jury acted corruptly, or perversely or erroneously, in relying upon the unconlradioted testimony of such witnesses.

Motion overruled.

Peters, C. J., Virgin, Libbey, Foster and Haskell, JJ., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

13 A. 275, 80 Me. 136, 1888 Me. LEXIS 22, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/doyle-v-maine-shore-line-railroad-me-1888.