-
Howard, J., orally. — The record had been read, and was present for the use of either party. It was the same with the advertisement in the newspaper. It was, therefore, immaterial upon which paper the counsel was looking, when he read the advertisement to the jury. It might have been so done, merely for convenience.
*580 To that convenience the Judge might properly assent. The exception was without foundation, and must be overruled.
Document Info
Citation Numbers: 33 Me. 579
Judges: Howard, Orally
Filed Date: 7/1/1851
Precedential Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 10/19/2024