History
  • No items yet
midpage
Fessenden v. Sager
53 Me. 531
Me.
1866
Check Treatment
Danforth, J.

It seems from the testimony reported that, during the progress of the trial, defendant’s counsel had notice of some communication between the plaintiff and some of the jurors. This was sufficient, at least, to have put him upon inquiry, and, by consenting to go on with the trial without objection, he consents to abide the result, as the authorities cited for plaintiff abundantly show; especially those of Hallock v. Franklin, 2 Met., 560, and Fox v. Hazelton, 10 Pick., 275. The verdict does not appear to be so clearly against the weight of evidence as to authorize us to disturb it. Motions overruled.

Judgment on the verdict.

Appleton, C. J., Cutting, Walton, Dickerson and Tapley, JJ., concurred.

Case Details

Case Name: Fessenden v. Sager
Court Name: Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Date Published: Jul 1, 1866
Citation: 53 Me. 531
Court Abbreviation: Me.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.