Rice v. Union Railroad Company

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

Rice v. Union Railroad Company

58 A. 629, 26 R.I. 128, 1904 R.I. LEXIS 40

DecidedApril 27, 1904

StatusPublished

This text of 58 A. 629 (Rice v. Union Railroad Company) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Rhode Island primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Rice v. Union Railroad Company, 58 A. 629, 26 R.I. 128, 1904 R.I. LEXIS 40 (R.I. 1904).

Pincite

Opinion

(1) Per Curiam.

This case is not properly before us, -the statement of evidence and rulings presented by the plaintiff not having been allowed by the justice who tried the cause, as required by General Laws cap. 251, § 6, nor substantiated by affidavit, as required by section 7 of said chapter. Nop is said statement assented to by defendant as being a full and complete statement of the evidence affecting the rulings in question.

While it is not necessary in all cases to bring up a statement of all the evidence taken in the case, it is necessary tó bring up a statement of .all the evidence which bears upon the questions on which the petition for a new trial, depends, as was done in Hackett v. Shaw, 24 R. I. 29. Vide certificate at the end of the testimony in that case.

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

(1) Per Curiam.

This case is not properly before us, -the statement of evidence and rulings presented by the plaintiff not having been allowed by the justice who tried the cause, as required by General Laws cap. 251, § 6, nor substantiated by affidavit, as required by section 7 of said chapter. Nop is said statement assented to by defendant as being a full and complete statement of the evidence affecting the rulings in question.

While it is not necessary in all cases to bring up a statement of all the evidence taken in the case, it is necessary tó bring up a statement of .all the evidence which bears upon the questions on which the petition for a new trial, depends, as was done in Hackett v. Shaw, 24 R. I. 29. Vide certificate at the end of the testimony in that case.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

58 A. 629, 26 R.I. 128, 1904 R.I. LEXIS 40, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rice-v-union-railroad-company-ri-1904.