History
  • No items yet
midpage
Miner v. Smith
6 N.H. 219
Superior Court of New Hampshir...
1833
Check Treatment
Richardson, C. J.

delivered the opinion of the court.

The circumstance, that Eaton removed from the state after the commencement of his action, and before judgment was rendered against him, is wholly immaterial in this case. A plaintiff, who is an inhabitant of ih:s state *220when the suit is commenced, is a competent endorser of his own writ.

We have always held, in this state, that an attorney, having authority to commence an action in the name of any individual, is authorized to place the name of that individual upon the writ as endorser. And when the endorsement is made, in the mode adopted in this case, it is always considered as the endorsement of the plaintiff and not of the attorney. A writ endorsed like this, in a case where the plaintiff lives out of the state, and where the statute requires a responsible person, who is an inhabitant of the state, is considered as having no such endorser as the statute requires.

Judgment for the defendant,

Case Details

Case Name: Miner v. Smith
Court Name: Superior Court of New Hampshire
Date Published: Jul 15, 1833
Citation: 6 N.H. 219
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.