Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1922-10-05
RESCRIPTS DOWN
FROM LAW COURT

The law court Wednesday handed
down . rescript in the Franklin
county case Of Joseph Lachance ".
The Skinner Lumber Company and
the Lumber Mutual Casualty Com
pany, insurers. dismissing the appeal
Of the defendants.
The rescript, which was drawn by
Associate Justice Charles J. Dunn Of
Orono, is as follows:
As q usual rule, in industrial acct
dent cases, foremen are included In
the category OF those whose knowl-
edge is regarded as that of the prin-
cipal.
In and Of itself, an oral notice may
not take the place Of . written one
under the workmen's compensation
act. Nevertheless, an oral notice may
! attain to the office of suggesting a
way, which the employer or his
agent may follow or not. to the ac-
ouirement OF such intellectual
acquaintance with fact as would be
the equivalent of g. notice regularly
given.
If, but for an injury arising out OF
and in the course of his employment,
an employee would not have died at
the time at which, and in the way in
! which. he did die, then, within the
meaning of the act. the unfortunate
occurrence. though 1t merely hasten
ed a deep-seated disorder to destiny,
must be held to have resulted N an
I in jury causing death.
-
death in the present case. The NAL
ady was chronic before the employee
was hurt by being thrown from a
horse. A finding and decree. by the
Chairman of the Industrial Accident
Commission, based upon the theory
that the death was due. not to the
character Of the disease acting alone
and progressing in it's usual course.
| but to that disease fastened to cul-
mination by an accidental injury. had
the support Of evidence.
The foreman of camp in the
lumber woods was the employers
agent. AS such agent. he had, seas
onably, knwledge of the employees
injury.
Appeal dismissed. Decree affirmed.
Case Arsene lie Blanc
/ The law court Wednesday handed
down a rescript in the Androscoggin
| county case of Arsene Leblanc VS..
Louis G. LaVasseur. overruling the
exceptions and motion of the defend
ant if remittitur filed, otherwise, mo-
ton for new trial granted.
The rescript per curiam is as fol-
! lows;
An allegation in a declaration in
a writ. in effect that the defendant
agreed with the plaintiff. at the time
of the making of a sale of an auto
mobile, that if it did not measure up
! to the terms of an accompanying
| ton, the vendor, would take the
machine back and pay him back his
money" sufficiently lays a promise
of a repayment by the defendant,
the count in all other respects being
good A demurrer to the declara-
ton was adiudged bad. and rightly
Being devoid of merit, an exception
to the overruling of the demurrer is
Itself overruled.
This action was begun 10 recover
the money back" the contract o.
sale having been rescinded for Il
breach of the warranty mentioned.
Defendants liability. as found by the
Jury, is abundantly supported by
proof. Damages We're awarded IN
the sum of $4,000. The award is
excessive in amount The price OF
the automobile apparently was
$3.50. 90. though the declaration fixes
it at S324O0O. Adopting the latter
figure, that price was made up by
the plaintiff thusly:
BY exchanging with a YER
dor truck. at the agreed
value of $4,000
an allowance for tires.
stated by plaintiff to have
amounted to $500, but
i consistently, ........ OO.CO
plaintiffs promissory note
to defendant, ..... loOo.W
Cash. $1,000
$:3;240 90
Plaintiff before this action was
commenced. had paid $4,000 on the
note. The immediate question IS,
tho nj inf IF will nav the