Dennison v. Perkins
Superior Court of New Hampshire
This was an action of trespass quare clausum fregit, commenced in this court and tried here, upon the general issue, at this term, and a verdict returned for the plaintiff, with ‡2 33 damages ; and the title of real estate ivas not in question.
Read the full summary
This was an action of trespass quare clausum fregit, commenced in this court and tried here, upon the general issue, at this term, and a verdict returned for the plaintiff, with ‡2 33 damages ; and the title of real estate ivas not in question. The defendants moved the court to limit the costs, because the damages assessed by the jury did not amount to forty shillings ; To which the plaintiff answered, that this suit was commenced before the passing of the statute of June 30, 1825, and was not therefore within the provisions of that act ; and that the statute of June 16, 1791, was repealed by…
1Opinion of the Court
By the court.
We shall not stop to inquire, whether the costs, in suits pending when the statute of June 30,18.25, was passed, can be limited under that statute ; because the statute of June 29,1819, ( 2 N. II. Laws 99,) gives us, in all actions, cc authority to limit and allow such bills of costs, as “ law and justice shall require and having no doubt, that the statute of June 16, 1791, was inadvertently repealed.*314without any saving clause as to actions pending, when the repealing act passed, we shall take the principle of the statute of 1791 as the guide of our discretion, under the act of…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Barron v. AshleySuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1827
- Town of Rumney v. Town of EllsworthSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1827