Concord Land & Water Power Co. v. Clough
47 A. 704, 70 N.H. 627
Opinion
The plaintiffs’ comment on the defendant’s failure to show the nature of the soil by inspection was an argument concerning the failure to pr.oduce available evidence, and was unobjectionable (Mitchell v. Railroad, 68 N. H. 96, 116); while the defendant’s unsworn statement of the reason why such evidence was not produced vitiates the verdict. Bullard v. Railroad, 64 N. H. 27.
Verdict set aside.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Concord Land & Water Power Co. v. Clough, 47 A. 704, 70 N.H. 627 (N.H. 1900).
47 A. 704 (Concord Land & Water Power Co. v. Clough) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Kerzty v. Wardymka
144 A. 263 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1929)
Knapp Ex Rel. Thayer v. Stone
103 A. 1005 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1918)
Hamburg-American Steam Packet Co. v. United States
250 F. 747 (Second Circuit, 1918)
Stoddard v. Grand Trunk Western Railway Co.
158 N.W. 7 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1916)
Flint v. Union Water Power Co.
62 A. 788 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1906)
Wright v. Davis
57 A. 335 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1904)