Russell v. Turner

62 Me. 496
CourtSupreme Judicial Court of Maine
DecidedJuly 1, 1874
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 62 Me. 496 (Russell v. Turner) 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
Russell v. Turner, 62 Me. 496 (Me. 1874).

Opinion

Appleton, O. J.

This is a complaint for flowage under E. S., c. 92, § I, in which there is no allegation that the defendant owned the land on which the dam causing the flowage was erected. It was held in Jones v. Skinner, 61 Maine, 25, that a complaint without such allegation was bad on demurrer.

But in the case at bar no demurrer was filed. The cause proceeded to trial, and a verdict was rendered in favor of the complainant. Exceptions were filed, which upon full consideration were overruled. Russell v. Turner, 59 Maine, 256. After all this, under leave of the court, the words, “on his own land” were inserted in the complaint by way of amendment. ■ To the allowance of this amendment exceptions were taken.

We must presume that the instructions were in all respects correct ; that none which the case required were withheld, and that every fact essential to the maintenance of the complaint was fully proved. As the case has been rightly tried on its merits, the amendment was properly allowed, though after verdict. The defendant has been neither surprised nor misled. Had he been, he would long before this have brought the fact to the notice of the court. The authorities are almost uniformly in favor of sustaining the propriety of the amendment. Cleaves v. Lord, 3 Gray, 66; East Boston Timber Co. v. Persons, 2 Hill., 126; Nichols v. Prince, 8 Allen, 404; Peck v. Waters, 104 Mass., 345; Banner v. Angier, 2 Allen, 128. Exceptions overruled.

Walton, Dickerson, Barrows, Yirgin and Peters, JJ., concurred.

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

Related

Union Manufacturing Co. v. Spies
195 N.W. 326 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1923)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
62 Me. 496, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/russell-v-turner-me-1874.