Rutherford v. Whitcher
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Troyer, for 200 cords of hemlock bark, and Assumpsit, for $1,000, the proceeds of the bark. Demurrer, for a misjoinder of counts in different forms of action.
1Opinion of the CourtFoster, J.
If either of the counts in trover or assumpsit had been omitted, it could have been inserted by amendment. Stebbins v. L. Ins. Co., 59 N. H. 143; Merrill v. Perkins, 59 N. H. 343. After the entry of the action, the declaration could be made what it might originally have been. But the statute of amendments, being a reenactment of a common-law judicial duty of disregarding or correcting errors and inefficiencies, does not affect a case like this, in which no amendment is needed. This declaration in trover and assumpsit on a single cause of action is authorized by a general common-law rule,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Metcalf v. GilmoreSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1879
- Stebbins v. Lancashire Ins.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1879
- Merrill v. PerkinsSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1879
- Buzzell v. StateSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1879
- Haley v. ColcordSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1879
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Owen v. WestonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1885
- Brooks v. HowisonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1885
- Broadhurst v. MorganSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1891
- Farnum v. Concord Land & Water Power Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1897
- Clough v. FellowsSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1884