King v. Jordan

103 A. 1047, 117 Me. 563, 1918 Me. LEXIS 62
CourtSupreme Judicial Court of Maine
DecidedJuly 14, 1918
StatusPublished

This text of 103 A. 1047 (King v. Jordan) 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
King v. Jordan, 103 A. 1047, 117 Me. 563, 1918 Me. LEXIS 62 (Me. 1918).

Opinion

By writ dated August 6, 1917, the plaintiff sued to recover the sum of four hundred and seventeen dollars and fifty cents which he claimed to be due to him as wages for his personal labor, and for board and materials performed and furnished the defendant by the plaintiff at the former’s request. The defendant denied liability, and asserted upon trial at the Androscoggin session in April, 1918, that-previously to the commencement of the suit, he had already fully paid the defendant for all that he had done. The jury returned a verdict for the defendant, and the case is here on plaintiff’s motion for a new trial. No sufficient reason is perceived why the motion should be granted. Motion overruled. Newell & Woodside, for plaintiff. Pulsifer & Ludden, for defendant.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
103 A. 1047, 117 Me. 563, 1918 Me. LEXIS 62, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/king-v-jordan-me-1918.