State v. Duranleau
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
1Opinion of the CourtKenison, C. J.
It is an elementary principle that it is incumbent on the State to show that violations of the motor vehicle law occur on a public “way.” R. L., c. 115, s. 1 XXXIV; State v. Michaud, 98 N. H. 356; R. L., c. 90, pt. 1, s. 1, as inserted by Laws 1945, c. 188. This burden incumbent on the State is customarily satisfied by direct proof that the highway was legally “laid out in the mode prescribed therefor by statute” (State v. Michaud, supra, or by other proof that it had been in use for public travel for twenty years. Summerfield v. Wetherell, 82 N. H. 513, 516. See Wilson v. Goodnow, 98 N. H.…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- McGovern v. . City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1923
- Commonwealth v. BallSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
- O'Malia v. WentworthSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1876
3Cited by12 opinions
- Samuel Gold, Howard Guy Halbett, John Frank Fusco v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1967
- Hooper v. GoldsteinSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1968
- Paras v. City of PortsmouthSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1975
- McDonnel v. LakingsSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1959
- Broughton v. ProulxSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2005
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.