Jackson v. Higgins

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Jackson v. Higgins

49 A. 574, 70 N.H. 637

DecidedDecember 5, 1900

StatusPublished

This text of 49 A. 574 (Jackson v. Higgins) 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

Jackson v. Higgins, 49 A. 574, 70 N.H. 637 (N.H. 1900).

Pincite

Opinion

Young, J.

The first exception raises no question of law. Whether there is any evidence, is a question of law; but whether it is sufficient, is a question of fact.

The statute of frauds does not apply to contracts of hiring which may be performed within one year.

The letter was clearly admissible.

Exceptions overruled.

Paksons, J„ did not sit: the others concurred.

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

Young, J.

The first exception raises no question of law. Whether there is any evidence, is a question of law; but whether it is sufficient, is a question of fact.

The statute of frauds does not apply to contracts of hiring which may be performed within one year.

The letter was clearly admissible.

Exceptions overruled.

Paksons, J„ did not sit: the others concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

49 A. 574, 70 N.H. 637, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jackson-v-higgins-nh-1900.