Fessenden v. Sager

53 Me. 531
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine·Decided July 1, 1866·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Danforth, J.

It seems from the testimony reported that, during the progress of the trial, defendant’s counsel had notice of some communication between the plaintiff and some of the jurors. This was sufficient, at least, to have put him upon inquiry, and, by consenting to go on with the trial without objection, he consents to abide the result, as the authorities cited for plaintiff abundantly show; especially those of Hallock v. Franklin, 2 Met., 560, and Fox v. Hazelton, 10 Pick., 275. The verdict does not appear to be so clearly against the weight of evidence as to authorize us to disturb it. Motions overruled.

Judgment on the verdict.

Appleton, C. J., Cutting, Walton, Dickerson and Tapley, JJ., concurred.

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

Fessenden v. Sager, 53 Me. 531 (Me. 1866).

53 Me. 531 (Fessenden v. Sager) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Ricker v. Davis
139 N.W. 1110 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1913)
Foedisch v. Chicago & North-Western Railway Co.
69 N.W. 1055 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1897)
People v. Flack
9 N.Y.S. 279 (Court Of Oyer And Terminer New York, 1890)
Flesher v. Hale
22 W. Va. 44 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1883)
Dower v. Church
21 W. Va. 23 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1882)