Legal Opinion
Arlington Mills v. Salem
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Decided December 6, 1927PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMarble, J.
“That the superior court has power to reserve without ruling important questions of law for the opinion of the supreme court is settled.” Manchester Amusement Co. v. Conn, 80 N. H. 455, 461; Glover v. Baker, 76 N. H. 261. The plaintiff’s exception to the order of transfer is therefore overruled.
The defendant contends that the petitions should have been dismissed because the plaintiff failed to comply with the requirements of P. S., c. 57 (P. L., c. 62), relating to the filing of inventories. The inventories in question were sworn to by the treasurer of the Arlington Mills before a notary…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Edes v. BoardmanSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1879
- West v. Boston & Maine RailroadSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1925
- Barker v. Publishers' Paper Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1918
- Amoskeag Manufacturing Co. v. ManchesterSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1899
- Olney v. RailroadSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1904
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. YoungSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1932
- Dombrowski v. DombrowskiSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1989
- Langford v. Town of NewtonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1979
- Wise Shoe Co. v. Town of ExeterSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1979
- GGP Steeplegate, Inc. v. City of ConcordSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2004
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.