Wentworth v. Jefferson
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Case, for injuries received from a defective highway. The plaintiff was unable to attend the trial, and her motion that the jury be allowed to go to her house and see her was denied. After-wards, when the jury were near the plaintiff’s house viewing the highway, by order of the court, her counsel in the presence of the jury proposed that they should go into the house and see her if the defendants’ counsel would consent.
Read the full summary
Case, for injuries received from a defective highway. The plaintiff was unable to attend the trial, and her motion that the jury be allowed to go to her house and see her was denied. After-wards, when the jury were near the plaintiff’s house viewing the highway, by order of the court, her counsel in the presence of the jury proposed that they should go into the house and see her if the defendants’ counsel would consent. The defendants’ counsel objected, and the jury did not see her. The defendants moved that the case be taken from the jury, and continued at the plaintiff’s expense. The…
1Opinion of the CourtBingham, J.
Whether the case should have been taken from the jury on account of the offer made by counsel, was a question of fact to be determined at the trial term. Zollar v. Janvrin, 47 N. H. 324. Although the plaintiff violated the law by travelling on Sunday, she might recover if the illegality of the act did not contribute to the accident. Corey v. Bath, 35 N. H. 530, 541; Sutton v. Wauwatosa, 29 Wis. 21; Sewell v. Webster, 59 N. H. 586.
Judgment on the verdict.
Stanley, J., did not sit: the others concurred.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Sutton v. Town of WauwatosaWisconsin Supreme Court · 1871
3Cited by3 opinions
- Merrill v. PerkinsSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1881
- Caher v. Grand Trunk Railway Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1908
- Pitman v. MerrimanSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1920