Mullins v. O'Brien
This text of 41 A.2d 917 (Mullins v. O'Brien) 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.
Opinion
Counsel for the plaintiffs contend that the finding that Mr. Sleeper informed the plaintiffs of their legal rights is inconsistent with the views expressed by the Presiding Justice at the hearing on the motions. It is true that the Presiding Justice appears to have entertained the belief that this court in its former opinion failed to consider the finding that the plaintiffs did not fully understand Mr. Sleeper’s explanation. But this confirms rather than contradicts the essential finding that Mr. Sleeper made an explanation. The exception is therefore overruled.
Bill dismissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
41 A.2d 917, 93 N.H. 358, 1945 N.H. LEXIS 132, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mullins-v-obrien-nh-1945.