Crawford v. Crawford
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
This writ was dated October 16, 1862, and was served on the trustee October 18, and on the principal defendant October 28, 1862. The court commenced November 4, 1862, to which said writ was returnable.
Read the full summary
This writ was dated October 16, 1862, and was served on the trustee October 18, and on the principal defendant October 28, 1862. The court commenced November 4, 1862, to which said writ was returnable. At this term the trustee was defaulted, but the defendant “ comes and moves said court that the writ be quashed, and said action be dismissed from the docket, for the reason that the writ in said action was made returnable on the first Tuesday of November, 1862, and the same was served on him, the said Thomas J. Crawford, on the 28th day of October, 1862, by reading the same to him by Ira S. M.…
1Opinion of the CourtBellows, J.
The general tendency of the decided cases in this State is to regard a motion to dismiss or quash a proceeding as addressed to the discretion of the court; although it is distinctly held, in Farley v. Day, 26 N. H. 527, on motion to quash a writ for want of legal service, that it was not a matter’ of discretion, but that the principles of law must be applied, as in other cases.
It is, however, universally held that such motion must be seasonably made, or the defect will be regarded as waived; and, in the absence of any specific rule, what is seasonable must depend upon the sound discretion of…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Tingley v. BatemanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1813
- Andrews v. BosworthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1807
- Bennett, White & Co. v. AllenSupreme Court of Vermont · 1858
- Trafton v. RogersSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1836
- Matthews v. BlossomSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1839