Rowell v. Conner

57 N.H. 323, 1876 N.H. LEXIS 99
CourtSupreme Court of New Hampshire
DecidedAugust 11, 1876
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 57 N.H. 323 (Rowell v. Conner) 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
Rowell v. Conner, 57 N.H. 323, 1876 N.H. LEXIS 99 (N.H. 1876).

Opinions

FROM HILLSBOROUGH, PROBATE COURT. The petition was filed in season. The limitation of two years within which such petition may be brought is held to begin from the expiration of the sixty days next succeeding the decree of the probate courts and not from the date of such decree. Holt v. Smart, 46 N.H. 9. *Page 324

The second objection is also untenable. The petitioner alleges that the administrator has failed to account for money for which he ought to have been charged, and has been wrongfully credited with money. This charge, if sustained, certainly constitutes a grievance which it is in the power of this court to remedy by a reexamination of his account. If a more specific claim is needed to enable the parties to proceed to a hearing, the remedy will be found in permitting the reasons for appeal to be amended, provided the nature of the claim is not changed, or, if the nature of the circumstances will permit, by requiring the appellant to file a specification. I do not see however, as the case now stands, that it would impose any hardship upon the appellee to require him to proceed to a hearing as to his account, if the appeal is allowed, upon the petition as it now stands.

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

Related

Broderick a Ap'ts v. Smith
23 A.2d 774 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1942)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
57 N.H. 323, 1876 N.H. LEXIS 99, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rowell-v-conner-nh-1876.