Kendall v. Flanders
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit, upon a promissory note. Writ dated September 16, 1899. Trial by jury. Tlie note was secured by mortgage; and tbe question submitted to tbe jury was tbe value of tbe real estate acquired by tlie plaintff by foreclosure in July, 1901, as bearing upon tlie question of the amount due upon the note.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit, upon a promissory note. Writ dated September 16, 1899. Trial by jury. Tlie note was secured by mortgage; and tbe question submitted to tbe jury was tbe value of tbe real estate acquired by tlie plaintff by foreclosure in July, 1901, as bearing upon tlie question of the amount due upon the note. Transferred from the May term, 1902, of the superior court by Youny, J. The defendant offered to show by one Kiel the price paid at an auction sale in 1896 or 1897 for an adjoining tract of ten acres, and that tlie land so purchased was not very different from a part of the mortgaged…
1Opinion of the CourtRemick, J.
1. The exclusion of the evidence of Kiel and Dane presents nothing but a question of remoteness. That the question of remoteness is left to the discretion of the judge who tries the case, is too well settled in this state to need the citation of authority.
2. It does not appear for what purpose tlie subsequent agreement was offered, nor upon what ground its exclusion was objected to. If offered for the purpose of modifying the contract evidenced by tlie note in suit, to have been admissible it must have been supported by a consideration. The plaintiff asserts that it was wholly without…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Schaefer v. IndyMac Mortgage ServicesCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2013
- Boulanger v. McQuestenSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1919
- Manchester v. DugganSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1908
- Foss v. Portsmouth, Dover & York RailwaySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1905