Legal Opinion
Nottingham v. Newmarket Manufacturing Co.
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Decided October 7, 1930PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMarble, J.
1. It is stated in the plaintiff’s brief that the suit is brought by the selectmen and tax collector in the name of the town (P. S., c. 60, s. 17; P. L., c. 66, s. 42), and that the designation of the town as plaintiff is merely for convenience. Neither the writ nor a copy of it is before the court, but the defendant does not contest the statement, and it is therefore presumed to be correct. See Canaan v. District, 74 N. H. 517, 536; Winchester v. Stockwell, 76 N. H. 193, 194.
The defendant takes the position that since it is not a resident of Nottingham (Woodsum Steamboat Co. v. Sunapee, 74…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Canaan v. Enfield Village Fire DistrictSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1908
- Farmington v. DowningSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1893
- Jaffrey v. SmithSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1911
- Bowles v. CloughSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1875
- Canaan v. Enfield Village Fire DistrictSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1906
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- United States v. Gilbert Associates, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1953
- National Truckers Service, Inc. v. Aero Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1972
- Raymond Holloway v. Wright & Morrissey, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1984
- Automatic Sprinkler Corp. of America v. MarstonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1947
- Hinkley & Donovan v. PaineDistrict Court, D. New Hampshire · 1977
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.