Legal Opinion

C. & R. Construction Co. v. Manchester

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided October 4, 1938PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPage, J.

The plaintiff does not suggest, as was done in Pike v. Buzzell, 75 N. H. 486, any specific fact not in the record that would serve to support its contentions. It apparently relies upon a chance that a trial by jury might disclose some circumstance as yet unknown and even unguessed. We cannot conjecture what facts a trial might disclose in addition to those to which the parties have agreed. The facts before us are not so meager or ambiguous or inconclusive that the case should be discharged without decision, as was done in Strafford County v. Dover, 74 N. H. 601.

The plaintiff relies upon the…

2Cited by7 opinions

  1. Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Rau Const. Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1942
  2. Post Road Realty, Inc. v. Zee-Bar, Inc.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1977
  3. Foley v. FoleySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1939
  4. Hackett v. Boston & Maine RailroadSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1949
  5. Niebler & Muren, S.C. v. Brock-White Co. of Wisconsin, Inc.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1984

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API