Bullock v. Wallingford

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Bullock v. Wallingford

55 N.H. 619, 1875 N.H. LEXIS 138

DecidedAugust 12, 1875

StatusPublished

This text of 55 N.H. 619 (Bullock v. Wallingford) 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

Bullock v. Wallingford, 55 N.H. 619, 1875 N.H. LEXIS 138 (N.H. 1875).

Pincite

Opinions

Evidence — Certificate of public officer. I think the paper signed by J. M. Thacher, acting commissioner of patents, was clearly inadmissible. It is not and does not purport to be a copy of any record or paper existing in the pension office, but is simply the statement of a fact within the knowledge of the gentlemen who signed it. The plaintiff was entitled to have that fact proved in the usual way, and could not legally be deprived of the privilege of cross-examination by the form in which the statement was put. I think the verdict must be set aside.

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

Evidence — Certificate of public officer. I think the paper signed by J. M. Thacher, acting commissioner of patents, was clearly inadmissible. It is not and does not purport to be a copy of any record or paper existing in the pension office, but is simply the statement of a fact within the knowledge of the gentlemen who signed it. The plaintiff was entitled to have that fact proved in the usual way, and could not legally be deprived of the privilege of cross-examination by the form in which the statement was put. I think the verdict must be set aside.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

55 N.H. 619, 1875 N.H. LEXIS 138, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bullock-v-wallingford-nh-1875.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack