Besse v. Boston & Maine Railroad

94 A. 965, 77 N.H. 605, 1915 N.H. LEXIS 42
Supreme Court of New Hampshire·Decided June 26, 1915·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Peaslee, J.

It is conceded upon one side that the evidence might properly be excluded in the discretion of the court; and upon the other side, that its exclusion as matter of law would be erroneous. The controversy is over the meaning of the record. In this situation the appropriate procedure is to return the case to the superior court for a statement of the questioned fact.

The consideration of the defendant’s exception to the denial of its motion for a directed verdict should await the outcome of an application to the presiding justice for a statement of the ground upon which the evidence was excluded.

Case discharged.

All concurred.

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

Besse v. Boston & Maine Railroad, 94 A. 965, 77 N.H. 605, 1915 N.H. LEXIS 42 (N.H. 1915).

94 A. 965 (Besse v. Boston & Maine Railroad) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Gerry v. Neugebauer
136 A. 751 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1927)