Larkin v. Alley
John F. Larkin v. Jaffer Alley.
Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam.
The defendant by his motion sought to set up a defence alleged to have been disclosed by the testimony but not relied upon at the trial. It is well settled under our practice that a verdict cannot be sustained upon grounds not presented at the trial, although deducible from the evidence.
Doyle v. MacDonald, 85 N. H. 545, 547;
Hawes v. Chase, 84 N. H. 170;
Bjork v. Company, 79 N. H. 402, 407;
Gage v. Railroad, 77 N. H. 289, 296 and cases cited.
A fortiori a verdict cannot be disturbed upon such grounds.
Judgment on the verdict.
Woodbury, J., did not sit.
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.