Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

64 N.H. 334

10 A 615

Nutter v. Varney

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided June 5, 1887

Supreme Court of New Hampshire · decided 1887-06-05

Assumpsit. The referee found for the defendant. On motion of the plaintiff, the cause was recommitted to the referee with in-, structions to report the facts without further hearing. Upon the return of the report the plaintiff was allowed to amend by filing a count in trover, and the case was reserved. At the June law term, 1886, the ruling permitting the amendment was sustained, and judgment ordered for the plaintiff on the amended count.

Relies on Smith v. Boynton · Bartlett v. Hodgdon · Sanborn v. Sanborn

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1887-06-05

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently January 1950

5 state decisions

2018871890190019101920193019401950decided

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 →

Clark, J.

¶1 Ordinarily, questions relating to the allowance of costs are not open to revision at the law terms unless the question is referred to the law term by the presiding justice at the trial term. Sanborn v. Sanborn, 41 N. H. 306; Bartlett v. Hodgdon, 44 N. H. 472; Smith v. Boynton, 44 N. H. 529; Harvey v. Reeds, 49 N. H. 531. If the question is properly before us, we see no error in the allowance of costs at the trial term. The event of the suit was in favor of the plaintiff (Eastman v. Holderness, 44 N. H. 18), *335 and costs follow the event of every action or petition unless otherwise ordered by law or by the court. G. L., c. 233, s. 1.

¶2 Exceptions overruled.

Carpenter, J., did not sit: the others concurred.
/64/nh/334 · .json · Public domain