Legal Opinion
Waisman v. Manchester
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Decided December 6, 1949No. 3861PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtDuncan, J.
The questions reserved by the Trial Court, and the plaintiff’s vigorous assertion that the proceedings before the board of mayor and aldermen should be vacated upon certiorari without putting her to the expense of trial of her appeal, invite consideration of the nature and scope of the appeal; for it is established law that where an adequate remedy is available upon appeal, certiorari will not be granted. Cloutier v. State Milk Control Board, 92 N. H. 199, 203; Grand Trunk Railway v. Berlin, 68 N. H. 168, 170; Logue v. Clark, 62 N. H. 184; Boston & Maine Railroad v. Folsom, 46 N. H. 64.
The…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Cloutier v. State Milk Control BoardSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1942
- New London v. DavisSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1904
- Bickford v. FranconiaSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1905
- State v. 4.7 Acres of LandSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1948
- Grand Trunk Railway Co. v. BerlinSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1894
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- State v. New Hampshire Retail Grocers Ass'nSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1975
- V.S.H. Realty, Inc. v. City of ManchesterSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1983
- Jackson v. RaySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1985
- Locke Development Corp. v. Town of BarnsteadSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1975
- Wolfeboro Neck Property Owners Ass'n v. Town of WolfeboroSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2001
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.