PATEY v. PEASLEE

No. 4544.

101 N.H. 26 (1957)

ARTHUR S. PATEY & a. v. ROY W. PEASLEE.

Supreme Court of New Hampshire.

Decided April 30, 1957.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Wyman, Starr, Booth, Wadleigh & Langdell and Stanton E. Tefft (Mr. Tefft orally), for the plaintiffs.

Orr & Reno and Charles H. Toll, Jr. (Mr. Toll orally), for the defendant.


PER CURIAM.

The defendant maintains that since the original petition had gone to judgment, it was not subject to amendment. See Superior Court Rule 57, 99 N.H. 617. The issue of the pendency of the action was before the Trial Court at the time of the hearing, and it cannot be assumed that the status of the action was ignored. Since the order permitted the amendment, a preliminary order vacating the judgment of dismissal is to be implied. See Chabot v. Shiner...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases