McKinney v. Page

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

McKinney v. Page

32 Me. 513

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine·Decided April 15, 1851·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Howard, J.,

orally.—The persons selected to see if the contract was fulfilled seem to be viewed by the counsel, as having the power of referees. If so, they could not without [515]*515notice to the defendant, lawfully proceed to the examination, upon which their decision was to be founded. But they are not considered by the court to have been invested with the power of referees, and their doings therefore are not conclusive. Their opinion was subject to be controlled by evidence.

Exceptions sustained.

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

Howard, J.,

orally.—The persons selected to see if the contract was fulfilled seem to be viewed by the counsel, as having the power of referees. If so, they could not without [515]*515notice to the defendant, lawfully proceed to the examination, upon which their decision was to be founded. But they are not considered by the court to have been invested with the power of referees, and their doings therefore are not conclusive. Their opinion was subject to be controlled by evidence.

Exceptions sustained.

McKinney v. Page, 32 Me. 513 (Me. 1851).

Pincite

32 Me. 513 (McKinney v. Page) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related