Rice v. Holden
55 N.H. 398, 1875 N.H. LEXIS 96
This text of 55 N.H. 398 (Rice v. Holden) 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
Rice v. Holden, 55 N.H. 398, 1875 N.H. LEXIS 96 (N.H. 1875).
Opinions
There is no question before the court as to the effect of the pendency of the bill in equity upon the suit at law, nor of the pendency of the suit upon the bill. The simple question is, whether the name of a case omitted from the printed docket of the court by mistake shall be restored. I think the motion should be allowed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Russell v. Dyer
39 N.H. 528 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1859)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
55 N.H. 398, 1875 N.H. LEXIS 96, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rice-v-holden-nh-1875.