History
  • No items yet
midpage
Locke v. Barrington
59 N.H. 530
| N.H. | 1880
|
Check Treatment

When the plaintiff limited her demand to one hundred dollars, the amount in controversy became limited to that sum, and the title to real estate not being in question, the court, either with or without the consent of the parties, might refer the action. G. L., c. 231, s. 10. The award exceeding the amount claimed, the plaintiff was entitled to judgment on remitting the excess. Hoit v. Molony, 2 N.H. 323; Sanborn v. Emerson, 12 N.H. 58; Pierce v. Wood, 23 N.H. 519; Willard v. Stevens, 24 N.H. 271; Taylor v. Jones,42 N.H. 25, 38.

Exceptions overruled.

FOSTER, J., did not sit: the others concurred. *Page 531

Case Details

Case Name: Locke v. Barrington
Court Name: Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Date Published: Jun 5, 1880
Citation: 59 N.H. 530
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.