Merrill v. Perkins
Merrill v. Perkins.
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Doe, C.
J.
The objection to the form of action might have been obviated at the trial by an amendment of the declaration, add *345 ing a new count in trespass.
Stebbins v. L. Ins. Co., 59 N. H. 143. And as the amendment, if made before the trial, would not have affected the trial or the verdict, it may be made now without disturbing the verdict.
Roulo v. Valcour, 58 N. H. 347. It does not appear to be necessary to inquire whether case, or trespass, is the right form of action.
The question put to the plaintiff’s husband was asked for the purpose of disparaging his credibility. How far justice required the cross-examination should be allowed to go in that direction was a question of fact to be determined at the trial term.
Gutterson v. Morse, 58 N. H. 165. When the amendment is made, there-will be Judgment on the verdict.
Allen, 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 10 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
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.