Rollins v. Brock

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Rollins v. Brock

109 A. 44, 79 N.H. 331, 1920 N.H. LEXIS 3

DecidedJanuary 6, 1920

StatusPublished

This text of 109 A. 44 (Rollins v. Brock) 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

Rollins v. Brock, 109 A. 44, 79 N.H. 331, 1920 N.H. LEXIS 3 (N.H. 1920).

Pincite

Opinion

Young, J.

Whether the judgment should be conditional or absolute is a question of fact, not law; that is, it depends on the facts of this case. The question, therefore, raised by the defendant’s exception is whether there is any evidence to warrant the court’s finding that justice requires the decree be absolute. The defendant disclaimed any intention of redeeming the property, so instead of there being no evidence to sustain the court’s finding, that is the only conclusion of which the evidence is fairly capable.

Exception overruled.

All concurred.

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

Young, J.

Whether the judgment should be conditional or absolute is a question of fact, not law; that is, it depends on the facts of this case. The question, therefore, raised by the defendant’s exception is whether there is any evidence to warrant the court’s finding that justice requires the decree be absolute. The defendant disclaimed any intention of redeeming the property, so instead of there being no evidence to sustain the court’s finding, that is the only conclusion of which the evidence is fairly capable.

Exception overruled.

All concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

109 A. 44, 79 N.H. 331, 1920 N.H. LEXIS 3, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rollins-v-brock-nh-1920.