Saltmarsh v. Bow
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
From Merrimack Circuit Court. Case, to recover damages for an injury claimed to have been caused by a defect in a highway in said town. The existence of the highway was admitted. It runs north and south —through Bow to Hooksett. The defect or obstruction complained of was a stone upon the east side of said highway, and near to the shoulder of the road, but in the gutter on that side of the road.
Read the full summary
From Merrimack Circuit Court. Case, to recover damages for an injury claimed to have been caused by a defect in a highway in said town. The existence of the highway was admitted. It runs north and south —through Bow to Hooksett. The defect or obstruction complained of was a stone upon the east side of said highway, and near to the shoulder of the road, but in the gutter on that side of the road. This stone was described by the different witnesses as sloping towards or into the highway, and as running back to the east some two feet or more, and rising towards the east, so that at the highest…
1Concurrence
It was for the jury to say, under proper instructions, whether the road at the point where the accident happened, was in a reasonably safe and suitable condition, considering the kind and amount of travel usually passing over it. Johnson v. Haverhill, 35 N.H. 74; Chamberlain v. Enfield,43 N.H. 356, and cases cited. The instruction requested was, therefore, properly refused.
The instruction excepted to has reference to the question of due care by the plaintiff as well as the condition of the road. The defendants had claimed in argument, as matter of law, that if there was a roadbed, well…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Johnson v. Town of HaverhillSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1857
- Chamberlain v. EnfieldSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1861