White v. Dakin

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

White v. Dakin

47 A. 611, 70 N.H. 632

Supreme Court of New Hampshire·Decided June 5, 1900·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Peaslee, J.

There was no evidence to justify a finding of fraud. Such a conclusión would have been mere conjecture. Deschenes v. Railroad, 69 N. H. 285, 288, et seq.

*633 The testimony of the creditor was properly excluded. Although not a party of record, he was directly interested in the result of the appeal. Foster v. Ela, 69 N. H. 460.

FJxceptions overruled.

Young, J., did not sit: the others concurred.

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

Peaslee, J.

There was no evidence to justify a finding of fraud. Such a conclusión would have been mere conjecture. Deschenes v. Railroad, 69 N. H. 285, 288, et seq.

*633 The testimony of the creditor was properly excluded. Although not a party of record, he was directly interested in the result of the appeal. Foster v. Ela, 69 N. H. 460.

FJxceptions overruled.

Young, J., did not sit: the others concurred.

White v. Dakin, 47 A. 611, 70 N.H. 632 (N.H. 1900).

Pincite

47 A. 611 (White v. Dakin) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related