Skip to main content
Supreme Court of Canada· 1898

Byron v. Tremaine

(1898) 29 SCR 445
EvidenceJD
Cite or share
Share via WhatsAppEmail
Showing the official court-reporter headnote. An editorial brief (facts · issues · held · ratio · significance) is on the roadmap for this case. The judgment text below is the authoritative source.

Court headnote

Byron v. Tremaine Collection Supreme Court Judgments Date 1898-12-14 Report (1898) 29 SCR 445 Judges Strong, Samuel Henry; Gwynne, John Wellington; Sedgewick, Robert; King, George Edwin; Girouard, Désiré On appeal from Nova Scotia Subjects Trust Decision Content Supreme Court of Canada Byron v. Tremaine (1898) 29 SCR 445 Date: 1898-12-14 Byron v. Tremaine. 1898: Nov. 7, 8; 1898: Dec. 14. Present:—Sir Henry Strong C.J. and Gwynne, Sedgewick, Klng and Girouard JJ. Trust—Lien for costs—Evidence—Husband and wife. APPEAL from a judgment of the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia[1], dismissing the plaintiff's action without costs and vacating the judgment of the Chief Justice at the trial who held that there was a cause of action, but that the evidence was insufficient to justify a verdict for the plaintiff. On the appeal the judgment of the court en banc was not attacked but the appellant urged that on the evidence given at the trial, she should have had a verdict. The court however agreed with the trial judge that there was not sufficient evidence and dismissed the appeal. Appeal dismissed with costs. Russell, Q.C., and Congdon for the appellant. Gormully, Q.C., for the respondant. [1] 31 N. S. Rep. 425. …

Read full judgment
Byron v. Tremaine
Collection
Supreme Court Judgments
Date
1898-12-14
Report
(1898) 29 SCR 445
Judges
Strong, Samuel Henry; Gwynne, John Wellington; Sedgewick, Robert; King, George Edwin; Girouard, Désiré
On appeal from
Nova Scotia
Subjects
Trust
Decision Content
Supreme Court of Canada
Byron v. Tremaine (1898) 29 SCR 445
Date: 1898-12-14
Byron v. Tremaine.
1898: Nov. 7, 8; 1898: Dec. 14.
Present:—Sir Henry Strong C.J. and Gwynne, Sedgewick, Klng and Girouard JJ.
Trust—Lien for costs—Evidence—Husband and wife.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia[1], dismissing the plaintiff's action without costs and vacating the judgment of the Chief Justice at the trial who held that there was a cause of action, but that the evidence was insufficient to justify a verdict for the plaintiff. On the appeal the judgment of the court en banc was not attacked but the appellant urged that on the evidence given at the trial, she should have had a verdict. The court however agreed with the trial judge that there was not sufficient evidence and dismissed the appeal.
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Russell, Q.C., and Congdon for the appellant.
Gormully, Q.C., for the respondant.
[1] 31 N. S. Rep. 425.

Source: decisions.scc-csc.ca

Related cases