Felker v. Chesley

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Felker v. Chesley

29 A. 540, 66 N.H. 381

CourtSupreme Court of New Hampshire

DecidedDecember 5, 1890

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 29 A. 540 (Felker v. Chesley) 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

Felker v. Chesley, 29 A. 540, 66 N.H. 381 (N.H. 1890).

Pincite

Opinion

Smith, J.

The defendant’s duty is not an open question. The arithmetical error could have been corrected by the moderator in a supplementary public declaration before the close of the meeting, but could not be corrected by the clerk in his record and return without such correctional action taken by the moderator. Bell v. Pike, 53 N. H. 473, 481; Opinion of the Justices, 53 N. H. 640, 643; Hill v. Goodwin, 56 N. H. 441.

Petition granted.

Doe, C. J., and Bingham, J., did not sit: the others concurred.

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

Smith, J.

The defendant’s duty is not an open question. The arithmetical error could have been corrected by the moderator in a supplementary public declaration before the close of the meeting, but could not be corrected by the clerk in his record and return without such correctional action taken by the moderator. Bell v. Pike, 53 N. H. 473, 481; Opinion of the Justices, 53 N. H. 640, 643; Hill v. Goodwin, 56 N. H. 441.

Petition granted.

Doe, C. J., and Bingham, J., did not sit: the others concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

29 A. 540, 66 N.H. 381, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/felker-v-chesley-nh-1890.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack