Schofield v. E. R. Bates & Co.
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
1Opinion of the CourtPage, J.
The trial court has discretion to consolidate the issues, in equity and at law, to submit them to a jury, and to direct the jury to deduct from any plaintiff’s verdict in the common-law action the amount received by the plaintiff in a settlement procured by the defendant’s fraud. Genest v. Company, 75 N. H. 365, 367. The case of McIsaac v. McMurray, 77 N. H. 466, did not overrule the Genest case. The reasons there advanced for trying out the equitable issues preliminary to consideration of the action at common law are those particularly appropriate to relief from mutual mistake of fact.…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- McIsaac v. McMurraySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1915
- Roberts v. Hillsborough MillsSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1932
- Genest v. Odell Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1909
- Gerry v. NeugebauerSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1927
- Vallée v. Spaulding Fibre Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1938
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- State v. WilliamsSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1943
- Bourne v. Town of MadisonDistrict Court, D. New Hampshire · 2007
- Brown v. ClarkSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1974
- Webster v. HubleySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1943