State v. Heselton
This text of 67 Me. 598 (State v. Heselton) 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.
Opinion
The plea in abatement is bad for duplicity. It tenders an issue upon at least three separate, distinct and independent propositions of fact. First, it avers that the county of Somerset had not been legally divided into jury districts. Second, that the towns of Anson and Palmyra had in their jury-box more names than the law allows. Third, that in the towns of Madison and St. Albans, no notice of the drawing of the jurors was given. Such a plea is clearly bad. State v. Ward, 68 Maine, 225. State v. Ward, 64 Maine, 545. Bacon’s Abridgment, Abatement, (P). Stephen on Pleading, 253.
Exceptions overruled.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
67 Me. 598, 1877 Me. LEXIS 110, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-heselton-me-1877.