State v. Jackson

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

State v. Jackson

33 Me. 259

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State v. Jackson. Read the opinion of the Court — 30 Me. 29 →

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine·Decided July 1, 1851·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

—No recognizance could be entered into. Neither the Attorney General nor the County Attorney, nor any other person had authority to recognize the State. And, if it could be done, the proceeding would be merely nugatory. No action could be sustained against the State upon it.

By a fair construction of the statute, we think it was not intended that appeals should be allowed to the State, in cases of this kind, and the action must, therefore, be dismissed.

On motion, costs against the State were allowed.

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

Per Curiam.

—No recognizance could be entered into. Neither the Attorney General nor the County Attorney, nor any other person had authority to recognize the State. And, if it could be done, the proceeding would be merely nugatory. No action could be sustained against the State upon it.

By a fair construction of the statute, we think it was not intended that appeals should be allowed to the State, in cases of this kind, and the action must, therefore, be dismissed.

On motion, costs against the State were allowed.

State v. Jackson, 33 Me. 259 (Me. 1851).

Pincite

33 Me. 259 (State v. Jackson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.