Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

36 Me. 14

Moore v. Holland

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided July 1, 1853

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · decided 1853-07-01

On Exceptions from Nisi Prius, Rice, J., presiding. Trespass. The plaintiff introduced several witnesses, and then rested his case. The defendant, before proceeding to call his witnesses, gave notice that he would insist upon requiring the plaintiff before stopping, to put in all his evidence, except what might be of a rebutting character. The defendant then called and examined many witnesses and stopped.

Decided 1853-07-01

Shepley, C. J. -

¶1This Court has decided that, in our practice, no rule exists by which a party is prevented from introducing cumulative testimony upon any point after he has rested his case and testimony has been introduced by his opponent; while the right of the Court is recognized, (in the exercise of its judicial discretion,) to enforce such a rule after giving seasonable notice that it will be enforced. In this case such a rule appears to have been enforced, and testimony material to sustain the plaintiff’s case appears to have been excluded, without previous notice of such a rule.

¶2Exceptions sustained. Verdict set aside and new trial granted.

/36/me/14 · .json · Public domain