Solomons v. Chesley
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
From Rockingham Circuit Court. Review. The above action is brought forward from the docket of October term, 1874, upon notice, by Chesley, of review, under the provisions of Gen. Stats., ch. 215, secs. 3, 9. The original'action was entered in the supreme judicial court against Chesley and one Alexander, at the April trial term, 1872, and was continued.
Read the full summary
From Rockingham Circuit Court. Review. The above action is brought forward from the docket of October term, 1874, upon notice, by Chesley, of review, under the provisions of Gen. Stats., ch. 215, secs. 3, 9. The original'action was entered in the supreme judicial court against Chesley and one Alexander, at the April trial term, 1872, and was continued. The defendant filed the general issue, with a brief statement, June 7, 1872. The plea was not formally joined by the plaintiffs. The action was continued from term to term until the October term of the circuit court, 1874, when it was…
1Concurrence
From the very learned work of Stephen, it appears (see Stephen on Pleading, pp. 75, 76, 254, and Appendix, note 34) that adding the similiter, and joining the issue, are strictly the same thing, the terms similiter and joinder in issue having exactly the same meaning. Originally the object of the similiter was to signify the party's acceptance not only of the traverse, but of the mode of trial offered.
We learn from this author, that in the beginning this mode of trial was called jurata e consensu, because it was not then a matter of right, but a matter of agreement. Now that the trial by jury…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Smith v. GilmanSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1826