Gerrish v. Gerrish
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Trover. The plaintiffs were called as witnesses by the defendants, who, in examining them, were permitted to put leading questions, to which the plaintiffs excepted. The plaintiffs’ counsel claimed the right to put leading questions in his examination of the plaintiffs as witnesses, because they had been put upon the witness stand by the defendants. The court declined to permit him to do so, and the plaintiffs excepted.
1Opinion of the CourtCarpenter, J.
Upon competent evidence, it is found that when the mortgage was executed the intention of the parties was, not to apply the mortgaged property upon the mortgage debt, but to protect it from the mortgagor’s creditors. In Ranlett v. Blodgett,
17 N. H. 298, it was held that if the mortgagee of personal property authorizes the mortgagor to sell the mortgaged property and appropriate the avails to his own use, the mortgage is void as against creditors, though there is no evidence of an actual intent to defraud them. This doctrine was reaffirmed in Putnam v. Osgood, 51 N. H. 192, and 52 N. H. 148,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Wilson v. SullivanSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1878
3Cited by5 opinions
- Bedford School District v. Caron Construction Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1976
- State v. MannionSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1927
- Pridham v. Cash & Carry Building Center, Inc.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1976
- Smith v. MorrillSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1902
- Zogoplos v. BrownSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1929