Ford v. Smith

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Ford v. Smith

62 N.H. 419

CourtSupreme Court of New Hampshire

DecidedDecember 5, 1882

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 62 N.H. 419 (Ford v. Smith) 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

Ford v. Smith, 62 N.H. 419 (N.H. 1882).

Pincite

Opinion

Carpenter, J.

The complaint is a civil suit, and any amendment may be made which is necessary to prevent injustice. G. L., c. 226, ss. 8, 9; Laws 1879, c. 7; Marston v. Jenness, 11 N. H. 156, 160; Little v. Dickinson, 29 N. H. 56, 60; Stebhins v. Lancashire Ins. Co., 59 N. H. 143. The question whether the complaint is defective by reason of the allegation that the child was begotten in another jurisdiction is not considered. The motion to dismiss is denied.

Amendment allowed.

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

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

Carpenter, J.

The complaint is a civil suit, and any amendment may be made which is necessary to prevent injustice. G. L., c. 226, ss. 8, 9; Laws 1879, c. 7; Marston v. Jenness, 11 N. H. 156, 160; Little v. Dickinson, 29 N. H. 56, 60; Stebhins v. Lancashire Ins. Co., 59 N. H. 143. The question whether the complaint is defective by reason of the allegation that the child was begotten in another jurisdiction is not considered. The motion to dismiss is denied.

Amendment allowed.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

62 N.H. 419, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ford-v-smith-nh-1882.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack