Grace v. Teague

18 A. 289, 81 Me. 559, 1888 Me. LEXIS 147
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine·Decided June 27, 1888·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Libbey, J.

The law is well settled, that, when an officer sets up his title to an office in defence of an action against him for his acts, he puts in issue his title to the office, and to justify must show that he has the legal title. It is not sufficient for bim to show that he is exercising the duties of the office as an officer de facto. The ruling of the court below on this point is correct. Pooler v. Reed, 73 Maine, 129; Andrews v. Portland, 79 Maine, 488, and cases there cited.

[560] It was agreed by the parties that the damages should not exceed the sum awarded. They are not excessive.

Exceptions and motion overruled.

Peters, C. J., Daneorth, Emery, Foster and Haskell, JJ., concurred.

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

Grace v. Teague, 18 A. 289, 81 Me. 559, 1888 Me. LEXIS 147 (Me. 1888).

18 A. 289 (Grace v. Teague) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Smith v. Wilson
43 A. 634 (Supreme Court of Rhode Island, 1899)