Legal Opinion

Leavitt v. New England Telephone & Telegraph Co.

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided November 3, 1903PublishedCited by 9 opinions

Case, for negligence. Trial by jury and verdict for the defendants. Transferred from the November term, 1902, of the superior court by Stone, J. The evidence tended to show that the defendants obtained permission or a license from the city council of Laconia to excavate through a portion of Main street, for the purpose of constructing underground conduits to connect with different buildings in the telephone service.

Read the full summary

Case, for negligence. Trial by jury and verdict for the defendants. Transferred from the November term, 1902, of the superior court by Stone, J. The evidence tended to show that the defendants obtained permission or a license from the city council of Laconia to excavate through a portion of Main street, for the purpose of constructing underground conduits to connect with different buildings in the telephone service. In so doing, it was necessary for the defendants to cut through the sidewalk in front of Smith block, making an excavation about one and a half feet wide and several feet deep.…

1Opinion of the CourtWalker, J.

Presumably, the jury were correctly instructed in regard to the law applicable to the case, as no exception was taken to the charge. If the evidence excepted to by the plaintiff was not relevant to the issue presented and tried by the jury under proper instructions, the verdict will not be disturbed unless it was also prejudicial. Stale v. Saidell, 70 N. H., 174; Marsh v. Insurance Co., 71 N. H. 253. The plaintiff’s claim was that the defendant, having dug up the street, was liable as a matter of law for injuries caused thereby, without regard to the fact that the city may have done a part of…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Mitchell v. Boston & Maine RailroadSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1894
  2. Marsh v. Concord Mutual Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1902
  3. State v. SaidellSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1899

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Sanders v. Boston & Maine RailroadSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1914
  2. Burnham v. StillingsSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1911
  3. Seeton v. DunbartonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1905
  4. Connecticut River Power Co. v. DickinsonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1909
  5. Lane v. Manchester MillsSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1908

4 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