Witherel v. Randall

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Witherel v. Randall

30 Me. 168

CourtSupreme Judicial Court of Maine

DecidedJuly 1, 1849

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 30 Me. 168 (Witherel v. Randall) 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

Witherel v. Randall, 30 Me. 168 (Me. 1849).

Pincite

Opinion

Shepley, C. J.

— This Court has twice decided that an original writ, without the seal of the proper court, is defective; and that the defect is not amendable. Bailey v. Smith, 3 Fairf. 196; Tibbets v. Shaw, 19 Maine, 204. In the present case there was no waiver by a plea to the merits.

The exceptions appear to have been properly taken, but the case was irregularly introduced into this Court before there had been any proceedings in the District Court suitable to present it for final judgment on the merits. Dagget v. Chase, 29 Maine, 356.

Exceptions dismissed.

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

Shepley, C. J.

— This Court has twice decided that an original writ, without the seal of the proper court, is defective; and that the defect is not amendable. Bailey v. Smith, 3 Fairf. 196; Tibbets v. Shaw, 19 Maine, 204. In the present case there was no waiver by a plea to the merits.

The exceptions appear to have been properly taken, but the case was irregularly introduced into this Court before there had been any proceedings in the District Court suitable to present it for final judgment on the merits. Dagget v. Chase, 29 Maine, 356.

Exceptions dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

30 Me. 168, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/witherel-v-randall-me-1849.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack