History
  • No items yet
midpage
Mooney v. Boston & Maine Railroad
65 N.H. 670
| N.H. | 1889
|
Check Treatment

It does not definitely appear upon what grounds the plaintiff's bill was dismissed at the trial term, after the hearing had therein; but, no other ground of dismissal being shown, it is fairly to be assumed that the presiding justice found as a fact that the plaintiff was not induced to refrain from employing counsel and giving the notice required by c. 71, Laws of 1887, relating to actions for personal injuries resulting in death, by any acts or representations of the defendants or their authorized agents, as is alleged in the bill. Taking this to be so, no question of law is raised by the plaintiff's exception to the order of dismissal. Issues of fact arising in the trial term are properly for the exclusive *Page 671 determination of that term, and, consequently, when they are heard and decided there, the decision will not be revised here. To support a bill of exceptions, some legal error must be alleged and shown.

Exceptions overruled.

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

Case Details

Case Name: Mooney v. Boston & Maine Railroad
Court Name: Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Date Published: Dec 5, 1889
Citation: 65 N.H. 670
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.