Legal Opinion

Perreault v. Allen Oil Co.

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided May 7, 1935PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMarble, J.

The court found on evidence informally presented that the facts did not bring the case within the provisions of the workmen’s compensation act. The evidence was sufficient to warrant this conclusion. Since the defendant participated in the proceedings and did not object to the procedure adopted, it cannot now complain of the method by which the facts were proved. Vidal v. Errol, 86 N. H. 585; Morin v. Insurance Co., 85 N. H. 471, 472, and cases cited.

This does not dispose of the matter, however, since, even though the statute did not apply, the parties had a right to settle their differences…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Tullgren v. Amoskeag Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1926
  2. Vidal v. ErrolSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1932
  3. Jaques v. Great Falls Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1891
  4. Salvas v. CantinSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1932
  5. Morin v. Travelers InsuranceSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1932

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. State v. ArsenaultSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1975
  2. Dr. Pepper Company v. HeimanWyoming Supreme Court · 1962
  3. Bouley v. Tilo Roofing Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1939
  4. Forsberg v. Volkswagen of America, Inc.District Court, D. New Hampshire · 1990
  5. Kelley v. LeeSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1937

7 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