Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

32 Me. 27

Lowe v. Dore

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided July 1, 1850

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · decided 1850-07-01

Debt upon a poor debtor’s bond. The trial was Tenney, J. The defence was that the debtor had taken statute oath. That defence was resisted on the ground, that the plaintiff had not been duly notified. He offered evidence to prove that fact.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently October 1860

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1850-07-01

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Shepley, C. J.,

¶1orally.—By statute, chap. 148, sec. 25, and the decisions under it, the justices are required to adjudicate upon the correctness of the notice.

¶2If they adjudge it correct, they are to proceed further; otherwise, their action is at an end.

¶3After the plaintiff had removed into this State, and his residence had been made known to the defendants, the notice was served, not upon the plaintiff, but upon his attorney. Was that a correct notice? That very question was before the justices for their decision. They considered the notice correct. That decision is conclusive. It is not examinable here. This has often been ruled. Plaintiff nonsuit.

/32/me/27 · .json · Public domain