Case Name: Ansel J. Whittemore v. Boston & Maine Railroad
Court: New Hampshire Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: New Hampshire
Decision Date: 1914-04-07
Citations: 77 N.H. 593
Docket Number: 
Parties: Ansel J. Whittemore v. Boston & Maine Railroad.
Judges: Plummer, J., did not sit: the others concurred.
Reporter: New Hampshire Reports
Volume: 77
Pages: 593–594

Head Matter:
Cheshire,
April 7, 1914.
Ansel J. Whittemore v. Boston & Maine Railroad.
Case, for wrongfully ejecting the plaintiff from a train. This is the same case reported 76 N. H. 388, and ante, 61. Upon this trial, at the October term, 1913, of the superior court, there was a verdict for the plaintiff. At the beginning of the trial and again after the verdict, the defendants made a motion for judgment, which was denied by Plummer, J., subject to exception. The ground of the motion was that upon the facts reported upon the first transfer and claimed to exist at the present trial, a judgment for the plaintiff would be in violation of the federal interstate commerce law.
Joseph Madden, for the plaintiff.
John E. Allen, for the defendants.

Opinion:
Walker, J.
In Whittemore v. Railroad, ante, 61, 62, the court said in reference to the former decision, that if it "involved the determination of a federal question, the defendants no doubt can preserve their rights and have the question reviewed in the federal court; but questions once decided in this court are not reexamined in the same case upon a subsequent transfer. Kidd v. Trust Co., 75 N. H. 154, 158." No additional reasons are now presented for a reconsideration of the federal question suggested, or for a modification of the opinion given on the first transfer, as reported in 76 N. H. 388. Nor is there occasion for the court in the exercise of its discretion (Hedding v. Gallagher, 72 N. H. 377, 379) to again consider the federal question which is again raised by the defendant upon the same state of facts.
Exception overruled.
Plummer, J., did not sit: the others concurred.