Athanasiou v. Roftsias
167 A. 265, 86 N.H. 595, 1933 N.H. LEXIS 89
This text of 167 A. 265 (Athanasiou v. Roftsias) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Hampshire primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
Athanasiou v. Roftsias, 167 A. 265, 86 N.H. 595, 1933 N.H. LEXIS 89 (N.H. 1933).
Opinion
If the excluded evidence was relevant, it was within the trial court’s discretion to exclude it for remoteness. As the exclusion may have been for this reason, the exception, being general, presents no legal question. Boulanger v. McQuesten, 79 N. H. 175, 176.
The case shows evidence warranting the argument excepted to.
Judgments on the verdicts.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Boulanger v. McQuesten
106 A. 492 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1919)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
167 A. 265, 86 N.H. 595, 1933 N.H. LEXIS 89, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/athanasiou-v-roftsias-nh-1933.