Seaver v. Manchester Street Railway
97 A. 220, 78 N.H. 584, 1916 N.H. LEXIS 68
This text of 97 A. 220 (Seaver v. Manchester Street Railway) 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
Seaver v. Manchester Street Railway, 97 A. 220, 78 N.H. 584, 1916 N.H. LEXIS 68 (N.H. 1916).
Opinion
The defendant claims that verdicts should have been directed because upon one construction of Mrs. Seaver’s testimony it could have been found that the steps were “all right.” But another and equally legitimate interpretation of her testimony leads to the conclusion that the steps were icy, slippery and dangerous.
Exception overruled-
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Feuerstein v. Grady
169 A. 622 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1933)
Goldstein v. United Amusement Corp.
169 A. 587 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1933)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
97 A. 220, 78 N.H. 584, 1916 N.H. LEXIS 68, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/seaver-v-manchester-street-railway-nh-1916.