Gilman v. Cate
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
From Grafton Circuit Court. Trespass, qu. cl.fr. The plaintiff moved to amend by filing a new count, as follows, viz., — “Also for that the defendants, on the thirteenth day of January, 1873, and on divers days and times, from said thirteenth day of January, 1873, to the date of the purchase of this writ, with force and arms broke and entered the plaintiff’s close, situated in said Bethlehem, bounded and described as follows : Beginning at the south-east' corner of lot 62,…
Read the full summary
From Grafton Circuit Court. Trespass, qu. cl.fr. The plaintiff moved to amend by filing a new count, as follows, viz., — “Also for that the defendants, on the thirteenth day of January, 1873, and on divers days and times, from said thirteenth day of January, 1873, to the date of the purchase of this writ, with force and arms broke and entered the plaintiff’s close, situated in said Bethlehem, bounded and described as follows : Beginning at the south-east' corner of lot 62, designated by number only; thence westerly to a point where formerly a spruce tree stood, marked on four sides as a…
1Concurrence
It appears, by the affidavit furnished in the case, that the plaintiff supposed that lot No. 62 enclosed the land on which the alleged trespass was committed, and that by mistake the abuttals were misdescribed; and, also, that evidence was offered tending to show that the alleged trespass was on ground outside of lot 62, and not enclosed in the abuttals set out in the writ. The counsel for the plaintiff supposed that the boundary called for in his writ was at H on the plan, instead of being at B, as it is now said to be. Now, assuming that the abuttals, actually set out in the writ, are made…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Tilton v. ParkerSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1827
- Brackett v. CrooksSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1851