Gitchell v. Andover
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Petition, under Gen. Laws, e. 75, s. 9. The petitioner alleged that he received the injury of which he complained, Nov. 17,1878; and, subject to the defendants’ exception, the court allowed the petition to be amended by striking out 17 and inserting 18.
1Opinion of the CourtStanley, J.
It was not the design of the statute to subject the parties to the expense of two trials. The plaintiff, while travelling on a highway in Andover, was seriously injured, and was unavoidably prevented from filing a claim for damages against the town within the time prescribed by the statute. He introduced evidence tending to prove all the facts essential to his right to recover, and he intends in good faith to prosecute his claim and bring it to a trial. The defendants offered evidence tending to disprove their liability, and contended'that leave should not be granted, unless it appeared, upon…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Owen v. DerrySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1902
- Chadbourne v. ExeterSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1892
- Welsh v. FranklinSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1900
- Hendry v. North HamptonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1901
- Page v. CamptonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1884
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.