Baker v. Brown
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit. The plea set out the writ and return on oyer, and enrolled the summons, and concluded as follows: Whereupon the said Brown prays judgment of the plaintiff’s said writ, because he says that the summons aforesaid is not in due form of law, as is prescribed, in this, namely: that by said wi’it the defendant is required to answer to the said plaintiff in our court of common pleas, to be holden at Exeter, in said county of Buckingham, on the second Tuesday of February,…
Read the full summary
Assumpsit. The plea set out the writ and return on oyer, and enrolled the summons, and concluded as follows: Whereupon the said Brown prays judgment of the plaintiff’s said writ, because he says that the summons aforesaid is not in due form of law, as is prescribed, in this, namely: that by said wi’it the defendant is required to answer to the said plaintiff in our court of common pleas, to be holden at Exeter, in said county of Buckingham, on the second Tuesday of February, 1847, in this suit; and in and by said summons the defendant is required to answer to the said plaintiff in a suit at…
1Opinion of the CourtGilchrist, J.
The plaintiff, in reenrolling the writ and service, has shown certain variances between the defendant’s enrollment and the original matter which he professes to enroll. These variances are particularly pointed out in assigning causes of demurrer'to the plea, and insisted on as material defects in the plea.
In Goodall v. Durgin, 14 N. H. Rep. 577, it is said that the party assuming to enroll is hound to an enrollment that is substantially correct; and if there' is an omission of a material word, there is not in substance a correct enrollment. It is also said that the enrollment should give a…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Nelson v. SwettSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1827
- Clark v. BrownSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1833
- Pike v. BagleySuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1827