Emerson v. White
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Trespass, for breaking and entering lot number thirteen in the Masonian Patent, so called, in the town of Moultonborough, and cutting timber trees.
Read the full summary
Trespass, for breaking and entering lot number thirteen in the Masonian Patent, so called, in the town of Moultonborough, and cutting timber trees. The plaintiff proved that in 1807, the Masonian proprietors entered upon and surveyed the land, and afterwards assigned it, by vote, to the right of Richard Wibird. .To connect himself with the heirs of Richard Wibird, he introduced the deposition of Daniel Austin, and a deed from Benjamin Penhallow and Susan, his wife, Mary Austin, by her attorney, and Thomas W. Penhallow, by his attorney, to the plaintiff, dated November 9, 1835. The deposition…
1Opinion of the CourtBell, J.
The first question presented by this case is, whether the evidence of pedigree was competent, the witness having omitted to state from whom he derived his information. Many of the facts stated in the deposition of the witness, Austin, are of a kind of which he could have no personal knowledge or'recollection. He says nothing of the sources of his information, except what he states as to certain family pictures. These are stated to have been from his childhood in the family, and regarded as pictures of some of his ancestors, and he says that when he was a boy, his grandmother pointed out to…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Stein v. BowmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1839
- Worthington v. HylyerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1808
- Mills v. CatlinSupreme Court of Vermont · 1849
- Jackson ex dem. People v. EtzNew York Supreme Court · 1826
- Jackson ex dem. M'Naughton v. LoomisNew York Supreme Court · 1820
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Dustin v. Cruise Craft, Inc.District Court, D. New Hampshire · 1980
- In re Estate of GaultSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1976