Legal Opinion

Heilman v. Whalley

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided May 2, 1939No. 3056PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBranch, J.

The defendant’s exceptions will be considered in the order in which they have been argued in his brief.

1. During the argument of plaintiffs’ counsel to the jury, the following proceedings took place:

“Gentlemen, the answer to the argument which has just been made in behalf of Mr. Whalley is very, very obvious when you stop to think of it. If Mr. Whalley does not admit liability, if he did not admit liability, then why in his behalf should my Brother Booth devote so much of his argument to the amount of damages?
“Mr. Booth: Objection and exception.
“The Court: Of course that is no admission of…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Salvas v. CantinSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1932
  2. Mann v. Peterson Motor Express, Inc.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1939
  3. Ferris v. SaulnierSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1939
  4. Lafferty v. HoulihanSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1923
  5. Damboise v. GoodmanSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1933

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Baker v. Salvation Army, Inc.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1940
  2. Amoskeag Industries, Inc. v. Board of Mayor of ManchesterSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1945
  3. White Mountain National Bank v. MalloySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1944
  4. Bogrett Ex Rel. Bogrett v. HromadaSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1941

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

Powered by the Exa API