Bates v. Hazen

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Bates v. Hazen

63 N.H. 618

DecidedJune 5, 1885

StatusPublished

This text of 63 N.H. 618 (Bates v. Hazen) 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

Bates v. Hazen, 63 N.H. 618 (N.H. 1885).

Pincite

Opinion

Blodgett, J.

The letter was competent, and no cause is shown for setting aside the verdict. The plaintiff testified that he took the note as collateral security; the defendant, that it was taken as payment. The issue thus presented is one of fact purely, and there is nothing in the evidence as reported tending to show that the judgment of the trial court was not fairly exercised in its consideration, or that the conclusion reached might not properly have been arrived at by any tribunal.

Exceptions overruled.

Bingham, J., did not sit: the others concurred.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Blodgett, J.

The letter was competent, and no cause is shown for setting aside the verdict. The plaintiff testified that he took the note as collateral security; the defendant, that it was taken as payment. The issue thus presented is one of fact purely, and there is nothing in the evidence as reported tending to show that the judgment of the trial court was not fairly exercised in its consideration, or that the conclusion reached might not properly have been arrived at by any tribunal.

Exceptions overruled.

Bingham, J., did not sit: the others concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

63 N.H. 618, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bates-v-hazen-nh-1885.