Boudreau v. Eastman

59 N.H. 467
Supreme Court of New Hampshire·Decided December 5, 1879·Published·Cited by 9 cases

Opinion

Bingham, J.

It does not appear to be material whether the plaintiff, or his brother, the undisclosed principal and plaintiff in interest, is plaintiff'of record. The writ may be amended by substituting the brother for the plaintiff (Judge of Probate v. Jackson, 58 N. H. 458), or by an entry that the brother appears and prosecutes the action as plaintiff in interest. Folsom v. O. F. Ins. Co., 59 N. H. 54. As neither the course nor the result of the trial would have been affected by such an amendment if it had been made before the trial, it may be made now without a new trial. Roulo v. Valcour, 58 N. H. 347. Let the record show the truth. When the amendment is made, there will be

Judgment for the plaintiff.

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

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

Boudreau v. Eastman, 59 N.H. 467 (N.H. 1879).

59 N.H. 467 (Boudreau v. Eastman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Abarca de Suárez v. Bank of Nova Scotia
46 P.R. 898 (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, 1934)
Unity v. Pike
44 A. 78 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1894)
State Ex Rel. Thorndike v. Collins
36 A. 550 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1894)
Owen v. Weston
4 A. 801 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1885)
Willoughby v. Holderness
62 N.H. 661 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1883)
Merrill v. Woodbury
61 N.H. 504 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1881)
Hazen v. Quimby
61 N.H. 76 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1881)
McDermott v. Hayes
60 N.H. 9 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1880)