Woods v. Blodgett
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Debt, on a bond dated December 1, 1841, signed by the defendant as a surety of one Drew, given in usual form to obtain tbe discharge of Drew for an arrest on an execution in the plaintiff’s favor. Plea, non est factum, with a brief statement of the defence, viz.: that Drew, according to the provisions of the statute, upon due and legal notice to the plaintiff, took the poor debtor’s oath.
Read the full summary
Debt, on a bond dated December 1, 1841, signed by the defendant as a surety of one Drew, given in usual form to obtain tbe discharge of Drew for an arrest on an execution in the plaintiff’s favor. Plea, non est factum, with a brief statement of the defence, viz.: that Drew, according to the provisions of the statute, upon due and legal notice to the plaintiff, took the poor debtor’s oath. To sustain this defence, the defendant gave in evidence certified copies of the petition, order of notice, service of the order, and of the doings of the justices thereon, as returned to the clerk of the…
1Opinion of the CourtParker, C. J.
The certificate of the magistrates in this case is only primd facie evidence that notice was given to the credit- or. This is a matter about which there has been a difference of views, as well here as elsewhere. In the case, 2 N. H. Rep. 421, Flanders vs. Thompson, it was held that the certificate was not conclusive evidence of notice, and the judge who drew up *571the opinion suggested that it could hardly bo regarded as prima fade evidence. In Osgood vs. Hutchins, 6 N. H. Rep. 374, the certificate was held to bo primá facie evidence, for reasons which are satisfactory; and in delivering the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Brown v. DavisSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1837
- Pettingill v. McGregorSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1841
- Osgood v. HutchinsSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1833
- Flanders v. ThompsonSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1821