Meredith Mechanic Ass'n v. American Twist Drill Co.

30 A. 1119, 66 N.H. 539
Supreme Court of New Hampshire·Decided June 5, 1891·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Doe, C. J.

In the first action, the amendment, if allowed, would be useless without a new trial. The motion to amend was not seasonably made, and it does not appear that justice requires-a new trial. The equitable principle of Britton v. Turner and Horn v. Batchelder (6 N. H. 481, 41 N. H. 86, Wadleigh v. Sutton, 6 N. H. 15, Elliot v. Heath, 14 N. H. 131, Clough v. Clough, 26 N. H. 24, 32, Davis v. Barrington, 30 N. H. 517, 528, Page v. Marsh, 36 N. H. 305, 308, Smith v. Newcastle, 48 N. H. 70, Blodgett v. Berlin Mills, 52 N. H. 215, 220, Ellsworth v. Brown, 55 N. H. 396) is applicable to a lessor’s claim for use and occupation. In the second action, the amendment, being seasonably applied for, should be allowed if justice requires it. Morgan v. Joyce, ante, p. 538.

Case discharged.

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

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

Meredith Mechanic Ass'n v. American Twist Drill Co., 30 A. 1119, 66 N.H. 539 (N.H. 1891).

30 A. 1119 (Meredith Mechanic Ass'n v. American Twist Drill Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Malcom v. Dorseman
148 A.2d 353 (Supreme Court of Delaware, 1959)
Sanborn v. Boston & Maine Railroad
79 A. 642 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1911)
Ackerman v. Middleby
78 A. 615 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1910)