Jordan v. Chase

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Jordan v. Chase

83 Me. 540

DecidedJuly 1, 1891

StatusPublished

This text of 83 Me. 540 (Jordan v. Chase) 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

Jordan v. Chase, 83 Me. 540 (Me. 1891).

Pincite

Opinion

Walton, J.

This is a suit in equity presented at the same time and supported by the same evidence as the foregoing suit of Alley v. Chase. And for one of the same reasons-, — namely, [541]*541the inherent weakness and utter insufficiency of the evidence in support of the facts on which the right to the relief asked for rests, — the same entry must be made.

O. P. Dutton, for complainant. Wiswell, King and Peters, B. E. Tracy, with them, for defendant.

Bill dismissed with costs.

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

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

Walton, J.

This is a suit in equity presented at the same time and supported by the same evidence as the foregoing suit of Alley v. Chase. And for one of the same reasons-, — namely, [541]*541the inherent weakness and utter insufficiency of the evidence in support of the facts on which the right to the relief asked for rests, — the same entry must be made.

O. P. Dutton, for complainant. Wiswell, King and Peters, B. E. Tracy, with them, for defendant.

Bill dismissed with costs.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

83 Me. 540, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jordan-v-chase-me-1891.