Cohen v. Pienkowski
This text of 144 A. 263 (Cohen v. Pienkowski) 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.
Opinion
The merits of the argument and the sufficiency of the court’s action to overcome its alleged impropriety cannot be considered. As it does not appear affirmatively, and as it is not to be assumed unless it thus appears, that exception was taken relative thereto, the law of the trial was final. Lee v. Dow, 73 N. H. 101, 105. “ Counsel should present his objection in a form calling for a ruling by the court, the presiding justice should allow exceptions only when they relate to a ‘ruling, direction or judgment’ of the court . . . and this court should consider such exceptions only as have been regularly taken.” Tuttle v. Dodge, 80 N. H. 304, 312.
Case discharged.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
144 A. 263, 83 N.H. 586, 1929 N.H. LEXIS 112, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cohen-v-pienkowski-nh-1929.