Nutter v. Varney
Nutter v. Varney.
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
Clark, J.
Ordinarily, questions relating to the allowance of costs are not open to revision at the law terms unless the question is referred to the law term by the presiding justice at the trial term.
Sanborn v. Sanborn, 41 N. H. 306;
Bartlett v. Hodgdon, 44 N. H. 472;
Smith v. Boynton, 44 N. H. 529;
Harvey v. Reeds, 49 N. H. 531. If the question is properly before us, we see no error in the allowance of costs at the trial term. The event of the suit was in favor of the plaintiff (Eastman v. Holderness, 44 N. H. 18), *335 and costs follow the event of every action or petition unless otherwise ordered by law or by the court. G. L., c.
233, s.
1.
Exceptions overruled.
Carpenter, 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.