Kenney v. Hampton

58 A. 1046, 73 N.H. 45, 1904 N.H. LEXIS 10
Supreme Court of New Hampshire·Decided October 4, 1904·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Walkek, J.

The first exception was not seasonably taken, And whatever objection there might be to the evidence was waived. The second exception is unavailing, because it is a natural inference from the testimony that whenever the witness had seen the plaintiff riding on the sidewalk it was in the vicinity of the place of the accident. And it is not open to serious doubt that the previous habit of the plaintiff to ride her bicycle on the .•sidewalk near the place of the accident was competent evidence that at that time she was occupying that part of the highway. State v. Railroad, 52 N. H. 528, 549; Proctor v. Freezer Co., 70 N. H. 3.

Exceptions overruled.

All concurred.

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

Kenney v. Hampton, 58 A. 1046, 73 N.H. 45, 1904 N.H. LEXIS 10 (N.H. 1904).

58 A. 1046 (Kenney v. Hampton) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Taschler
356 A.2d 697 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1976)
Capelle v. Trober
112 A. 798 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1921)