Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1911-11-27
RESCR|PTS
In Important Somerset
And Sagadahoc Cases.
Defendant Gets, Judgement in
Breach Of Contract.
Award to Plaintiff In Case Of Oh.
struetlon Of Right Of Way.

day, by the law court IN important
Somerset and Sagadahoc cases. In the
Somerset county case of MagOon VS..
Flanders, involving a breach of con-
tract, in which a verdict had been Civ
en- for the plaintiff in the court below.
The Defendants exceptions are sus-
tanned and judgment given For the de-
PENDANT. The Sagaddhoc county case,
that Of Jane NJ. McIntire VS.. Charles
G. Lauckner, in which the plaintiff
| seeks 10 recover damages for the OBJ
struction Of right of way to burial
| lot, is settled by the law court. by Civ
ing Judgment for the plaintiff for SO
Both rescripts are drawn by Chief Jus
tee Whtehouse and are as follows:
Somerset County.
W. z. Magoon, US. Il. l.. Flanders
Reseript, Whitehouse, c. j.
This is an action on the case to re-
cover damages for an alleged failure
on the part of the defendant to convey
to the plaintiff certain real estate ac-
cording TO the terms Of the following
contracts signed by the parties. viz:
I'm consideration of $3.50 paid by W.
e. Magoon on the following terms, IS
per month for one year and $500 at the
end of the year and the balance year
~, r. L. Flanders agrees to give said
Magoon a good and sufficient title TO
| the land and buildings thereon situated
north of the Catholic cemetery on
North street in Skowhegan.
skowhcgan. May 4. 1909"
The plaintiff was also allowed to add
second count for money had and
received, under which h claimed to
| recover $50 and interest, being the
amount Of twelve payments under the
| contract at IS per month.
| The defendant eontended that the
| pIaintiff waived whatever right he had
under he contract to purchase the
property. and by bis conduct was es-
| topped 10 claim any damages from the
! defendant
AT the close Of the testimony the
presiding Judge orderAs a verdict for
the plaintiff for SIS. and interest. with
| the stipulation that Il the exceptions
| taken by the defendant were sustained
| by the law court, judgment should be
| entered for the defencant.
| 1t is the opinion OF the court that
the exceptions must be sustained
There was sufficient evidence if be
| lieved te support i finding by the jury
that the plaintiff failure to receive 4
| deed Of the premises was due te his
| own breach of The contract and not to
| any falIlt on he part ii the defendant.
! +. is conceded that tile plaintiff failed
| 10 pay the 5000 ut the end of the first
year, ard no explanation or excuse was
offered for the failure, except that he
aid not have the money to pay it; but
| il does not appear that he asked for
any further time or indulgence. On
The contrary thu evidence would au-
thorize the jury to find that in April
1910, he accepted the proposition made
by the defendant for him to occupy
the place another year at the same
'.rentafs of S. per month. if the defen-
dant did not sell the property. The
plaintiff admitted that he had rot
earned enough during the winter TO
pay his expenses and when at the be-
ginning Of the second Year, the defen-l
dant found Il purchaser for the proper
". the plaintitf does not appear 10
have made any objection To the sale.
and for three weeks made no claim for
damages, except the value of 4 hen
yard built by him, for which he ac-
cepted satisfaction from the defendant.
without amy suggestion that he would
have liked more time to pay the $500
and without any complaint that lie had
not been fairly treated by the defend
ant.
The written contract is silent in re-
gard to the plaintiffs occupation of the
premises during the first year. But
the plaintiff was allowed to take pos
10 in lxrs
of IS a month, a fair rental for the
place There was no suggestion that
the plaintiff was TO have the use of
the premises for a year, rent free, If
he failed to pay the $500 at the end of
the year without fault of the defendant
on the contrary it appears from the de-
PENDANT testimony that near the close
of the year. in April 1910, the plaintiff
asked for a reduction of rent" and
under the practical Interpretation Civ
en- to the contract by the parties, the
jury would have been justified in
reaching the conclusion that the
monthly payments made by the plain
tiff the first year We're to be retained
by the defendant as a fair rental dur
that time, if the plaintiff gave upl
possession by reason of his failure to
pay the 5000, without fault of the de-
PENDANT.
The practical result was that the
plaintiff occupied the house for year
at a reasonable rental, and by leaving
at the beginning of the second year, he
sustained no damage for which the de-
PENDANT was legally or equitably re-
sponsible.
According to the stipulation of the
parties, the certificate must be.
Exceptions sustained. Judgment for
the defendant.
Sasadahoc County.
Jane NJ. McIntire VS. Charles G.