White v. White
White v. White.
Headnotes
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Stanley, J.
An order of court authorizing the attachment was not necessary (Laws of 1879, c.
57, s. 28); and there is no occasion to inquire whether there were any defects of notice or entry. If objections to such defects were not waived by the defendant’s general appearance (Colby v. Knapp, 13 N. H. 175;
*211 Wright v. Boynton, 87 N. H. 9, 19;
March v. Eastern R. R., 40 N. H. 548, 583), they were waived by bis appearance and motion for a continuance. His motion to dismiss, although made within the first four days of the first term (Seaver v. Allen, 48 N. H. 473), was not seasonably made after his motion for a continuance was submitted.
Smith v. Whittier, 9 N. H. 464;
Downer v. Shaw, 22 N. H. 281;
State v. Richmond, 26 N. H. 232, 242;
Gilmanton v. Ham, 38 N. H. 108;
Robinson v. Potter, 43 N. H. 191;
Peebles v. Rand, 43 N. H. 342;
Candia v. Chandler, 58 N. H. 127.
Exceptions overruled.
Foster, J., did not sit: the others concurred.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 1 case
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.