History
  • No items yet
midpage
Ayers v. Boston & Maine Railroad
39 A. 1021
| N.H. | 1894
|
Check Treatment

It would serve no useful purpose to comment upon evidence such as appears in this case.

The defendants' motions and requests were properly denied. Lyman v. Railroad, 66 N.H. 200, 204; Foss v. Railroad, 66 N.H. 256, 260; Felch v. Railroad, 66 N.H. 318, 320, 322, 323; Boothby v. Railway, 66 N.H. 342; Walker v. Railroad, 64 N.H. 414; Paine v. Railway, 63 N.H. 623; Merrill v. Express Co., 62 N.H. 514; Nutter v. Railroad, 60 N.H. 483, 485; Tuttle v. Farmington, *Page 209 58 N.H. 13, 14; Griffin v. Auburn, 58 N.H. 121, 134; Paine v. Railway,58 N.H. 611; Gilman v. Noyes, 57 N.H. 627; Sleeper v. Sandown, 52 N.H. 244; Cheshire Railroad v. Foster, 51 N.H. 490, 493; Page v. Parker, 43 N.H. 363; Palmer v. Portsmouth, 43 N.H. 365.

Exceptions overruled.

WALLACE, J., did not sit: the others concurred.

Case Details

Case Name: Ayers v. Boston & Maine Railroad
Court Name: Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Date Published: Dec 5, 1894
Citation: 39 A. 1021
Court Abbreviation: N.H.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.