Jodoin v. Baroody
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
1Opinion of the CourtBlandin, J.
The plaintiff’s exceptions are overruled. In regard to his first contention, that the Court erred in granting the defendant’s motion to strike off the default and judgment, it is sufficient to say that the record warranted a finding that the defendant John was justified in assuming his employer would undertake his defense. The action of the Trial Justice being well within his discretion (see R. L., c. 398, s. 2; Superior Court Rule 8, 93 N. H. Appendix) presents no further question for us to consider. Lancaster National Bank v. Whitefield &c. Trust Company, 92 N. H. 337. See also, Lewellyn v.…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Harlow v. LeclairSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1927
- Caswell v. Maplewood GarageSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1930
- Cohn v. SaidelSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1902
- Lewellyn v. FollansbeeSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1946
- Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. LougeeSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1938
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Cunningham v. City of Manchester Fire DepartmentSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1987
- McIntosh v. Personnel CommissionSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1977
- In re Estate of FullerSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1979
- Whitten Oil, Inc. v. Fireman's Fund InsuranceSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1972
- MacFarlane v. MacKeanDistrict Court, D. New Hampshire · 1996