58 N.H. 18
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Decided December 5, 1876
Supreme Court of New Hampshire · decided 1876-12-05
Entry, on a mortgage made by the defendant to the plaintiff. The defendant made no defence. One Plumer, who had been admitted to defend the action, offered to prove that he had a good title to the demanded premises, not derived from the plaintiff or the defendant, and that the defendant, having no title, could convey none to the plaintiff.
Relies on Blaisdell v. Ladd · Pike v. Pike · Buckman v. Buckman
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1876-12-05
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently June 1933
6 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
View the full empirical analysis of this case →
¶1 Plumer ought not to have been admitted to defend. He has no interest in this suit. There is no way in which he will be prejudiced, or his rights affected, by the judgment. The evidence of his title was therefore irrelevant and inadmissible. Buckman v. Buckman, 4 N. H. 319; Blaisdell v. Ladd, 14 N. H. 129; Boscawen v. Canterbury, 23 N. H. 188; Pike v. Pike, 24 N. H. 384; Dunbar v. Starkey, 19 N. H. 160.
¶2 Motion denied.