TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

State ex rel. Thorndike v. Collins

State (Ex Rel. Thorndike & A.) v. Collins & A.

State ex rel. Thorndike v. Collins, 36 A. 550 (N.H. 1894)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of New Hampshire · State Highest Courts
Decided
June 5, 1894
Judges
Chase, Wallace
Citations
36 A. 55068 N.H. 46
Headnotes
A petition under P. S., c. 205, s. 5, may be amended by substituting a legal voter for a petitioner who is not a legal voter.
Summary
Petition, by twenty-one persons alleged to be legal voters in Concord, for the abatement of a liquor nuisance in that city. Two of the petitioners were not such voters. The petition was amended by substituting two voters for them, subject to the defendants’ exception.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Chase

Chase, J.

The statute required the petition to be signed by not less than twenty legal voters of Concord. P. S., c. 205, s.

5. It purported to be so signed, and was therefore sufficient upon its face; but it turned out that only nineteen of the signers possessed the requisite qualification. Was the defect amendable ? There is nothing in the nature of this action (State v. Saunders, 66 N. H. 39;

Rancour’s Petition, 66 N. H. 172) that excludes it from the operation of the general rule, authorizing the court to allow amendments to be made in civil actions by adding new parties or substituting new ones for original parties, if justice requires the change to be made. P. S., c.

222, ss.

7, 8, 11;

State v. Batcheller, 66 N. H. 145;

Annis v. Gleason, 56 N. H. 16;

Judge of Probate v. Jackson, 58 N. H. 458;

Boudreau v. Eastman, 59 N. H. 467;

Buckminster v. Wright, 59 N. H. 153;

Hazen v. Quimby, 61 N. H. 76;

Willoughby v. Holderness, 62 N. H. 661;

Fitch v. Nute, 62 N. H. 700;

Owen v. Weston, 63 N. H. 599, 603, 604;

Smith v. Hadley, 64 N. H. 97. The requirement that there shall be twenty petitioners who are legal voters in the town *47 where the alleged nuisance exists was designed to prevent frivolous and vexatious suits. So many persons of mature age, having an opportunity to learn whether a nuisance exists, by a residence in the vicinity for six mouths at least (P. S., c.

31, ss. 1, 8), are not likely to join in a petition unless there is reasonable cause for instituting the proceeding. As a guaranty of the necessity and good faith of the suit, the petition of such persons may well be regarded as equivalent to an information filed by the solicitor of the county. P. S., c.

205, s. 5. The object of the requirement is not defeated by substituting a qualified person for one not qualified. The substitute will not become a party unless he approves of the proceeding. Moreover, in legal effect, he becomes a petitioner from the beginning of the action.

Whittier v. Varney, 10 N. H. 291, 302, 303.

Whether justice required that the amendment should be made is a question of fact that is not reviewable here.

Broadhurst v. Morgan, 66 N. H. 480.

Exception overruled.

Wallace, 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.

1903: 11909: 11913: 11919: 11924: 11926: 11930: 11935: 11993: 119032026peak 1903 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. National Marine Underwriters, Inc. v. McCormack634 A.2d 1008 (N.H. 1993)
  2. State ex rel. Hyde v. Lynch55 A. 553 (N.H. 1903)
  3. In re Harris299 F. 395 (1st Cir. 1924)
  4. America Land Co. v. City of Keene41 F.2d 484 (1st Cir. 1930)
  5. Remick v. J. Spaulding & Sons Co.131 A. 608 (N.H. 1926)
  6. Trustees of Dartmouth College v. Cameron87 A. 254 (N.H. 1913)

Most recent

  1. National Marine Underwriters, Inc. v. McCormack634 A.2d 1008 (N.H. 1993)
  2. Atwood v. Berry179 A. 412 (N.H. 1935)
  3. America Land Co. v. City of Keene41 F.2d 484 (1st Cir. 1930)
  4. Remick v. J. Spaulding & Sons Co.131 A. 608 (N.H. 1926)
  5. In re Harris299 F. 395 (1st Cir. 1924)
  6. George W. Blanchard & Son Co. v. American Realty Co.108 A. 291 (N.H. 1919)

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.

Authorities cited 13

DepthCaseCited by
State ex rel. Rhodes v. Saunders, 25 A. 588 (N.H. 1889) 30
Owen v. Weston, 4 A. 801 (N.H. 1885) 24
Boudreau v. Eastman, 59 N.H. 467 (1879) 9
Buckminster v. Wright, 59 N.H. 153 (1879) 7
State ex rel. Blodgett v. Batcheller, 19 A. 1090 (N.H. 1889) 6
Judge of Probate v. Jackson, 58 N.H. 458 (1878) 5
Rancour's Petition, 20 A. 930 (N.H. 1889) 5
Broadhurst v. Morgan, 29 A. 553 (N.H. 1891) 3
Annis v. Gleason, 56 N.H. 16 (1875) 3
Willoughby v. Holderness, 62 N.H. 661 (1883) 3
Fitch v. Nute, 62 N.H. 700 (1883) 3
Hazen v. Quimby, 61 N.H. 76 (1881) 3
Smith v. Hadley, 7 A. 115 (N.H. 1886) 2

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list