Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

59 N.H. 512

Peirce v. Burroughs

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided June 5, 1880

Supreme Court of New Hampshire · decided 1880-06-05

Bill in Equity, by the administrators of the estate of Ann R. P. Burroughs against the surviving executor of the will of Charles Burroughs, for an accounting of the income of property bequeathed by the defendant’s testate to Mrs. Burroughs. The defendant claims credit for certain stocks, and rights to take new stock, purchased for Mrs. Burroughs.

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently February 1904

3 state decisions

Relies on Page v. Whidden · Stewart v. Harriman · Clements v. Marston

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1880-06-05

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Smith, J.

¶1 At common law the surviving party could testify in equity in matters of accounting before a master, in his discretion, subject to revision by the chancellor. Page v. Whidden, 59 N. H. 507. • The statutes permitting parties to testify were not intended to repeal this rule of the common law. The intent of the legislature was in the direction of enlarging, and not of restricting, the admission of testimony. Clements v. Marston, 52 N. H. 31; Stewart v. Harriman, 56 N. H. 25, 33; Day v. Day, 56 N. H. 316, 318. There is nothing in this case which shows that the discretion of the referee was not fairly exercised, and we see no occasion to revise it. *513 As the witness was properly allowed to testify, the whole amount of credits claimed should be allowed. This result makes it unnecessary to examine the other questions raised at the hearing.

¶2 Case discharged.

Clark, J., did not sit: the others concurred.
/59/nh/512 · .json · Public domain