¶1This was a petition for the review of an action in a justice’s court, in which the petitioner alleged that he had discovered new and material evidence. On a hearing of the merits, it appeared that the " newly discovered evidence was merely cumulative ; but the Couet, in addition to this objection, observed that the petition would not be sustained here on any ground, inasmuch as it was clearly within the jurisdiction of the court of Common Pleas, to which tribunal it seemed to be the intent of the legislature that applications of this sort should be preferred.
6 Me. 412
Merrill v. Crocket
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Decided May 15, 1830
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · decided 1830-05-15
<p>. This court, in the exercise of its general power to grant reviews in all cases, will not sustain an application for the review of an action in a justice’s court, where the party grieved may have redress in the court of Common Pleas.</p>
Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently December 1948
1 state decisions
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1830-05-15
View the full empirical analysis of this case →