Dyer v. Collins

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Dyer v. Collins

85 A. 1, 109 Me. 569, 1912 Me. LEXIS 149

DecidedDecember 2, 1912

StatusPublished

This text of 85 A. 1 (Dyer v. Collins) 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

Dyer v. Collins, 85 A. 1, 109 Me. 569, 1912 Me. LEXIS 149 (Me. 1912).

Pincite

Opinion

This is an action of trespass on the case to recover for injuries alleged to have been sustained by the plaintiff by the negligence of the defendant, in negligently and wilfully deserting him on the fishing grounds in the darkness of the night. And by reason of such desertion he was left alone in his dory and was compelled to face a rough and choppy sea without food or water for about eight hours before he reached the United States Government Light-Ship off Cape Elizabeth Shore. The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff for $25.00 and the defendant filed a general motion for a new trial and [570]*570excepted to a refusal by the presiding Justice to give requested instructions. Motion and exceptions overruled.

Frederick W. Hinckley, for plaintiff. Benjamin Thompson, and Frederick J. Laughlin, for defendant.

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

This is an action of trespass on the case to recover for injuries alleged to have been sustained by the plaintiff by the negligence of the defendant, in negligently and wilfully deserting him on the fishing grounds in the darkness of the night. And by reason of such desertion he was left alone in his dory and was compelled to face a rough and choppy sea without food or water for about eight hours before he reached the United States Government Light-Ship off Cape Elizabeth Shore. The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff for $25.00 and the defendant filed a general motion for a new trial and [570]*570excepted to a refusal by the presiding Justice to give requested instructions. Motion and exceptions overruled.

Frederick W. Hinckley, for plaintiff. Benjamin Thompson, and Frederick J. Laughlin, for defendant.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

85 A. 1, 109 Me. 569, 1912 Me. LEXIS 149, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dyer-v-collins-me-1912.