Warner Bank v. Clement & Co.
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
Stanley, J.
There is no doubt of the power of the court in any case, for sufficient cause, to bring forward an action and vacate the judgment rendered therein.
Bellows v. Stone, 14 N. H. 175;
Frink v. Frink, 43 N. H. 508;
Hillsborough v. Nichols, 46 N. H. 379;
Judge of Probate v. Webster, 46 N. H. 518;
Stickney v. Davis, 17 Pick. 170 ;
McClew v. Burt, 5 Met. 200 .
What is sufficient cause is a question of fact, depending upon the particular circumstances of each case. These should be established by evidence at the trial term.
Case discharged.
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 7 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.