Court Opinion

ID: 3552876
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2016-07-05 23:04:56.764355+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:24:41.349623
License: Public Domain

The horse was exempt from attachment, if required for farming or teaming purposes, or other actual use. G. L., c. 224, s. 2). This was a question of fact, which has been determined at the trial term in favor of the plaintiff. Somers v. Emerson, 58 N.H. 48; Parshley v. Green, 58 N.H. 271; Rice v. Wadsworth, 59 N.H. 100; Richards v. Hubbard, 59 N.H. 158; George v. Fellows, 59 N.H. 206; Cutting v. Tappan, 59 N.H. 562; Hall v. Nelson,59 N.H. 573; George v. Fellows, 60 N.H. 398; Jaquith v. Scott, 63 N.H. 5. The evidence was sufficient to justify the finding.
Exception overruled.
ALLEN, J., did not sit: the others concurred.