Legal Opinion

Hood v. Nashua

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided June 4, 1940No. 3175PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtAllen, C. J.

One position the defendant takes is that the evidence warranted no conclusion that the water entering the plaintiff’s cellar came from the culvert. It is admitted that the cellar is flooded only at times when water runs through the culvert in quantity. There was evidence that the land north of the plaintiff’s and on which the water from the culvert emptied had “a very hard subsoil about two feet from the surface” and that the plaintiff’s cellar floor was at a level which permitted the flow of water into it from the topsoil. The distance from the outlet of the culvert to the cellar was not…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Bouley v. Tilo Roofing Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1939
  2. Vallée v. Spaulding Fibre Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1938
  3. Gilman v. ConcordSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1937

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Cannata v. Town of DeerfieldSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1989
  2. Bartlett v. Mutual PharmaceuticalDistrict Court, D. New Hampshire · 2010
  3. Com. v. Self, C.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2016

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

Powered by the Exa API