Bedford v. Rice

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Bedford v. Rice

58 N.H. 227

DecidedDecember 5, 1877

StatusPublished

This text of 58 N.H. 227 (Bedford v. Rice) 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

Bedford v. Rice, 58 N.H. 227 (N.H. 1877).

Pincite

Opinion

Smith, J.

The plea is bad. Dinsmore v. Pendexter, 28 N. H. 18; Parker v. McKean, 34 N. H. 375, and authorities cited.

A plea in abatement should be filed in the first court in which the defendant has an opportunity to file it, to avoid the cost of further litigation, if the plea is good. The defendant might file the plea with his demand for a jury trial, and neither would be a waiver of the other. The demand is an objection to the police court trying a case, when the sum demanded in damages exceeds the constitutional limitation of 113.33.

Respondeat ouster.

Stanley and Clark, JJ., did not sit.

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

Smith, J.

The plea is bad. Dinsmore v. Pendexter, 28 N. H. 18; Parker v. McKean, 34 N. H. 375, and authorities cited.

A plea in abatement should be filed in the first court in which the defendant has an opportunity to file it, to avoid the cost of further litigation, if the plea is good. The defendant might file the plea with his demand for a jury trial, and neither would be a waiver of the other. The demand is an objection to the police court trying a case, when the sum demanded in damages exceeds the constitutional limitation of 113.33.

Respondeat ouster.

Stanley and Clark, JJ., did not sit.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

58 N.H. 227, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bedford-v-rice-nh-1877.