Moses v. Craig
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
1Opinion of the CourtParsons, C. J.
Whether the defendant was guilty of misconduct requiring the withdrawal of the case from the jury and its continuance to the next term is a question of fact for the trial court. Though the defendant did not formally move for a continuance, his conduct making the continuance necessary was an insistent demand for such continuance, and the order imposing terms was within the principle of the rules of court providing that continuances required by the necessities of a party should be made upon terms. Rules 30, 32,-71 N. H. 680.
Doubtless the defendant may elect to become default. If he does, the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hutchinson v. Manchester Street RailwaySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1905
3Cited by3 opinions
- Jacques v. Manchester Coal & Ice Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1916
- Flannagan v. Prosper Shevenell & Son, Inc.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1926
- Holly Andren v. Wayne DakeCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2020