70 N.H. 1
45 A 714
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Decided June 5, 1899
Supreme Court of New Hampshire · decided 1899-06-05
Debt, to recover double damages for the bite of a dog. Subject to the defendant’s exception, the court allowed the plaintiff to amend by changing the form of action to case, and held that the defendant was not entitled, as a matter of right, to have the. jury double the damages.
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1899-06-05
Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently April 2011
1 district · 2 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 The question of allowing the amendment was for the trial term. The defendant had no right to demand that the-merely ministerial act of doubling the damages should be performed by the jury; for it is the province of the jury to find facts*, and the only question of fact in this part of the case was the plaintiff’s actual damages.
¶2 Exceptions overruled.,