Oxford Democrat. [volume] (Paris, Me.) 1833-1933, 1858-11-19
Supreme Judicial Court.
ACTIONS rRIKD.


No. 1903. Daniel Stone, IT,. vs.. David
W. Frost. Esq.
This was an action OF assumpsit, in which
the plaintiff seeks to collect note OF hand
alleged to have been given him by the do
PENDANT, tesiato Hphraim Briggs. late OF
Norway. deceased. Tho defence was tina,
said note was not in tbs hand writing Of
said Briggs. Various witnesses were called
by both parties who had been acquainted
with the hand writing Of said Briggs, and
testified rs 20 their belief in the matter.
The plaintiff also introduced evidence TO
prove that Brigg, made payment upon
said note and at the same time read 10, and
directed said payment to be endorsed.
heJury did not agree. Perry for plain.
tin. NJ. II. Dunnell and W. W. Virgin for
defendant.
No. 1888. Simeon Cummings ". George
W. King.
Tb. was an action Of ,rover. In which the
plaintiff alleged that the defendan, in 1854,
in driving his logs to the place Of manuiac.
ture. also drove certain le..' belonging TO
plaintiff. and converted them 10 the defend.
ants nee. The defence was the general Is
sue with brief statement, alleging that II
any Of plaintiff. logs were driven with the
defendants, they werc 80 intermiIcd that
thew could no, h. conveniently scrarated.
The defendant offered proof upon this point
and also evidence to show he never convert.
I'd any Of plaintiffs logs. Verde, for de-
PENDANT.
Judge Howard and +. l.. Cummings for
plaintiff. John j Perry for defendant.
No. los. Andrew Merry6cld v. Simeon
Brown.
This was an action Of a.umpsit for not
iul6lling contract for cutting timber. The
defense was alleged non.performancc on the
part Of plaintiff. Verde, for plaintiff for
s2eS,li.
IIammons Tor plaintiff, Howard & chas'
Tor defendant.
No. LIS. Asa Scvcry vs.. Aaron sc1sry,
jr.
A.sump.it on note Of hand given by de-
PENDANT to plaintiff. The defense was the
statute Of limitations. Submitted 10 the
cour, by agreement Of partics. judgment
for plaintiff.
S,owcll for plaintiff, Randall a Winter
for defendant.
No. 80. Inhabitants OF Sumner vs.. In,
habi,ants Of Greenwood.
Action for support Of pauPSr. Verdict
for defendants.
Gilbert for plaintiff, Walton and Kim
ball for defendant.
No. 80. Charlie. Fuller ". VIM. Sim,
mons.
Action on note Of hand. The deien.,
was, want OF notice TO the endorer. De,
fultcd. Continued on report.
Harlow for plaintiff, Record 4 Walton
defendant.
No. 90. Dan!or,h l.. Harlow w. Inhab-
liant. Of Peru.
Assumpsi, on a contract Tor the support
Of town pauper. The defense was, that
the plaintiff never furnished supplies for
aid pauper. Submitted to the court by
ngreemen, OF parties. Judgment for plain
til for $500 and no costs.
Harlow for plaintiff, Randall 4 Winter
foT defendant.
No. 80. 70. S. Howe vs.. Moses W.
Treat.
THIS was an action on a note OF hand
commenced by tho plaintiff as endorser.
Defense, want u consderation-,hc note
having been given FOR intoxicating liquor'.
Verdict for defendant.
Harlow for plaintiff, Randall 4 Winter
for defendant.
No.. TamlsOn S. Neal ct. al vs.. John
Foyc.
Action Of trovcr for cow, by husband
and wife. alleged to be the property Of wife,
aud morigagcd by husband. The case by
agreement. after the evidence was out, was
submitted to the court, and nOnsuit was or.
dcred.
Howard and brigham for plaintiffs.
Harlow for defendant.
George welch. Bethel, convicted Of horse
stealing, wa. sentenced to two years in the
States Prison.