Carr v. Adams
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Bill in Equity, for the determination of confused and uncertain boundaries between the parties. At the May trial term, 1899, the defendant moved that the plaintiff be required, under the 26th rule of court, to file a deposition taken by him of a witness, not a party, residing in Massachusetts. The court granted the motion and ordered the deposition to be filed by June 10 of that year.
Read the full summary
Bill in Equity, for the determination of confused and uncertain boundaries between the parties. At the May trial term, 1899, the defendant moved that the plaintiff be required, under the 26th rule of court, to file a deposition taken by him of a witness, not a party, residing in Massachusetts. The court granted the motion and ordered the deposition to be filed by June 10 of that year. The plaintiff excepted, and duly filed a bill of exceptions, upon the ground that the deposition was his private property and subject to his own exclusive use and custody until he elected to use it, and not…
1Opinion of the CourtBlodgett, C. J.
“ Upon motion to the court, the depositions which either party proposes to use on the trial are to be filed with the clerk; and, after suck motion is granted, no depositions are to be used except tliose which are thus filed.” Rules of Court, No. 26. “The court may from time to time establish rules and orders of practice, consistent with the laws, for conducting and regulating its business.” P. S., c. 204, s. 5. The plaintiff lias pointed •out no inconsistency between the rule and the laws, and none exists.
But aside from the rule, the court had the power to make the order. “ Courts of justice…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Taylor v. ThomasSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1914
- Lehigh Navigation Coal Co. v. Keene Coal Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1938
- Smith v. TallmanSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1934
- Dame v. CompanySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1948
- Hyland v. HinesSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1921