Foss v. Foss

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Foss v. Foss

104 A. 633, 117 Me. 572, 1918 Me. LEXIS 100

DecidedOctober 22, 1918

StatusPublished

This text of 104 A. 633 (Foss v. Foss) 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

Foss v. Foss, 104 A. 633, 117 Me. 572, 1918 Me. LEXIS 100 (Me. 1918).

Pincite

Opinion

This case comes up on a motion for new trial by the plaintiff. The only witnesses were the plaintiff and defendant. The testimony was squarely conflicting. It was for the jury to settle the conflict. They did it in favor of the defendant. Whatever might be the opinion of the court upon the evidence, they cannot intervene unless it appears that the verdict is inherently wrong or so evidently influenced by bias, prejudice or misunderstanding as to work a wrong. This is not a case where we can interfere. Motion overruled. Shaw & Thornton, for plaintiff. W. S. Lewin, for defendant.

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

This case comes up on a motion for new trial by the plaintiff. The only witnesses were the plaintiff and defendant. The testimony was squarely conflicting. It was for the jury to settle the conflict. They did it in favor of the defendant. Whatever might be the opinion of the court upon the evidence, they cannot intervene unless it appears that the verdict is inherently wrong or so evidently influenced by bias, prejudice or misunderstanding as to work a wrong. This is not a case where we can interfere. Motion overruled. Shaw & Thornton, for plaintiff. W. S. Lewin, for defendant.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

104 A. 633, 117 Me. 572, 1918 Me. LEXIS 100, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/foss-v-foss-me-1918.