The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1869-02-13
supreme judicial Court.

~ JANUARY TERM-wALToN. j., PRESIDING.
/ FRIDAY.-John Mcdonald v. Inhabitants of Otis
field. Action to damages for injuries to self
horse and gig the 18th of August 1867 from de-
feet in the highway. The alleged detect was honey
pot on the Coon road in front of Cobb's house.
ledge some IA inches deep underay the whole breadth
OF the road The plaintiff says that out OF the fs-
sures Of this ledge water gushed up and made per-
manenty soft place; that after the accident defend-
ants put in stone causeway the breadth Of the road
and that water would flow from the lower side of the
causeway when none entered on the upper SIDE
showing permanent and local detect The plain
tits horse coming upon this at the rate of seven
miles an hour was suddenly stopped and thrown, the
gig shaft broken and the plaintiff projected some IL
feet, as he says. upon his head and shoulders max
ing somerset. He states that his arm is still lame
mas caused him much pain and for many months
after the injury was unfit for business; that the in
jury TO the muscles attached to the shoulder blade
causes his arm to affect curved form than is
natural; that his fine mare, worth $3.50, grew sick
lane and poor, and dwindled in value to 500 when
be exchanged her. .-,., .-
Defence-The accident happened after long rain
sorm, when honeypots abound. This as not
permanent defect in the highway; it was just made
by the recent rains, and he defendant TOWN. had no
notice; they say hat the horse was purposely ILL
that the plaintiff is Stimulating injuries to his arm;
mat 1t Is unnatural that injury to the muscles
behind should cause his arm TO bend forward; that
be had recovered damages years before OF another
town, and was using his experience in soorkino uD
this case
That the road was defective and that the pla;ntiA
suffered soma damage was not contested. The de-
tendants counsel contended that the damages snf.
fered by the plaintiff in his person were ins,pniA-
can't 3hat the doctors who examined his shoulder at
the time found only blush upon the skin, the mo-
lions all perfect and that his sufferings were dona
mum absQse injaria; the town had no notice ard
were not liable. Tr e
Mr.. Strout, the learned counsel for the defence.
illustrated how necessary it is that lawyer shouId
know everything. In the matter of names of bones
and the names, attachments, insertion and uses of
muscles he showed himself more at home than one
OF the professional witnesses whom he cross-exam
ined.
We note tor our common place book on cross-ex-
aminatops the questions Is this statement in which
you contradict Mr.. A., this statement in which you
contradict Mr.. b. and this other statement in which
you contradict Mr. c. are all of these true your
oner statements, and are your other statements as
true as these?
-, oage. Shepley & Strout
1stnuei y. merrill d al. v. David Boyd a. al. Ac-
sount anne xed for labor and materials u, ,ano,.no
'"o sco"s IN the summer of 1868. $500 -fs-f a
Delence-Labor and materials /, ~ e,~,., j, 4. :.
plaintiffs but for one Monten Evidence 49,. -. ~.
compromised. fEf 'u'' case
. symonds sila5Is sweat-strout g Gage.