Legal Opinion

Wallace v. Stearns

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided December 5, 1950No. 3971PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJohnston, C. J.

The defendants claim that the plaintiff is barred from maintaining the present petition because of the decree of dis missal of August 12, 1949. It is not disputed that both petitions brought by this plaintiff are based upon the same facts. However a new remedy was given the plaintiff by chapter 266 of the Laws 1949. This statute added the following provision to the powers of the Superior Court in partition proceedings: “The holder in possession of a fee simple interest in such real estate may have partition, irrespective of the class or duration of the estate of any petitionee named in the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Brindley v. MearaIndiana Supreme Court · 1935
  2. Richardson v. MonsonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1854
  3. Black v. Sylvania Producing Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1922

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Eldridge v. EldridgeSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1993
  2. Norton v. PattenSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1984
  3. Bartlett v. BartlettSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1976
  4. In re BeauregardSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2004
  5. Appeal of Franklin Lodge of Elks 1280 BPOESupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2004

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API