Haynes v. Ordway

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Haynes v. Ordway

58 N.H. 167

DecidedAugust 5, 1877

StatusPublished

This text of 58 N.H. 167 (Haynes v. Ordway) 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

Haynes v. Ordway, 58 N.H. 167 (N.H. 1877).

Pincite

Opinion

Allen, J.

The former judgment in the suit for malpractice was on the merits, and is conclusive as to all matters then in issue between these parties. King v. Chase, 15 N. H. 9. The question of malpractice having been thus determined in favor of this plaintiff, it is not open to the defendant to try the same question again in this suit, and he is estopped from setting up in defence what was determined against him by the former judgment. Edwards v. Stewart, 15 Barb. 67; Stevens v. Miller, 13 Gray 283; Bigelow on Estoppels 45.

Judgment for the plaintiff.

Stanley and Foster, JJ., did not sit.

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

Allen, J.

The former judgment in the suit for malpractice was on the merits, and is conclusive as to all matters then in issue between these parties. King v. Chase, 15 N. H. 9. The question of malpractice having been thus determined in favor of this plaintiff, it is not open to the defendant to try the same question again in this suit, and he is estopped from setting up in defence what was determined against him by the former judgment. Edwards v. Stewart, 15 Barb. 67; Stevens v. Miller, 13 Gray 283; Bigelow on Estoppels 45.

Judgment for the plaintiff.

Stanley and Foster, JJ., did not sit.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

58 N.H. 167, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/haynes-v-ordway-nh-1877.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack