History
  • No items yet
midpage
Burnham v. Butler
58 N.H. 568
| N.H. | 1879
|
Check Treatment

Evidence which proves to have been improperly admitted may be stricken out, under proper instructions to the jury; and it is a question of fact, to be determined at the trial term, when this may be done. Judge of Probate v. Stone, 44 N.H. 593, 607; Zollar v. Janvrin, 47 N.H. 324, 326; Harris v. Holmes, 30 Vt. 352. In his knowledge of the trial, the presiding justice has better means of deciding the question of fact than others can have who were not at the trial. Fuller v. Bailey, 58 N.H. 71, 72; Hamaker v. Eberley, 2 Binn. 506, 510. If it appears to him, after verdict, that the jury have been prejudiced by the objectionable evidence, he is warranted in setting the verdict aside.

Case discharged.

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

Case Details

Case Name: Burnham v. Butler
Court Name: Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Date Published: Mar 5, 1879
Citation: 58 N.H. 568
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.