Gagnon v. Connor

9 A. 631, 64 N.H. 276
CourtSupreme Court of New Hampshire
DecidedDecember 5, 1886
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 9 A. 631 (Gagnon v. Connor) 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
Gagnon v. Connor, 9 A. 631, 64 N.H. 276 (N.H. 1886).

Opinion

*277 Doe, C. J.

In Brigham v. Este, 2 Pick. 420, the writ was abated because it contained no declaration. The law allows an insufficient declaration to be amended for the purpose of curing a defective statement of the cause of action. In a suit seasonably brought, the declaration may be amended after the time when a new action for the same cause would be barred by the statute of limitations. Merchants’ Bank v. Stevenson, 7 Allen 489, 490. In that case, and in Wiley v. Yale, 1 Met. 553, 555, an amendment was denied on the ground that as a matter of fact justice did not require it. In this ease, the question of fact whether justice required the amendment, and the question of fact raised by the motion to set aside the verdict on the ground of excessive damages, were determinable at the trial term, and no error of law appears. Merrill v. Perkins, 61 N. H. 262.

Judgment on the verdict.

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

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

Related

Brown v. Fitzgerald
47 A. 415 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1899)
Tucker v. Lake
29 A. 406 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1892)
Morgan v. Joyce
30 A. 1119 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1891)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
9 A. 631, 64 N.H. 276, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gagnon-v-connor-nh-1886.