Drake v. Bowles
| Decision Date | 05 November 1952 |
| Citation | 92 A.2d 161,97 N.H. 471 |
| Parties | DRAKE v. BOWLES. |
| Court | New Hampshire Supreme Court |
McCabe & Fisher and John D. McCarthy, Dover, for plaintiff.
Charles F. Hartnett, Dover, for defendant.
Discovery in this state may be characterized as broad and liberal and its functions with desirable flexibility under the discretionary control of the presiding justice of the Trial Court. Kann v. Wausau Abrasives Company, 81 N.H. 535, 541, 129 A. 374. It is favored as a means for the adequate preparation for trial and as a method for ascertaining the truth. State v. Cote, 95 N.H. 108, 111, 58 A.2d 749. 'Because of the liberal laws in this state for the taking of depositions in advance of trial,' Lefebvre v. Somersworth Shoe Co., 93 N.H 354, 356, 41 A.2d 924, 926, the necessity for the remedy of discovery in either law or equity is not as acute as it otherwise would be. Staargaard v. Public Service Company, 96 N.H. 17, 18, 69 A.2d 4. However, the remedy is available and has continued to develop for the most part without the aid of statute or special rules of court. R.L. c. 371, § 1; Reynolds v. Burgess Sulphite Fibre Company, 71 N.H. 332, 51 A. 1075, 57 L.R.A. 949; LaCoss v. Town of Lebanon, 78 N.H. 413, 101 A. 364; Ingram v. Boston and Maine Railroad, 89 N.H. 277, 197 A. 822. Cf. Veino v. Veino, 96 N.H. 439, 78 A.2d 522.
In personal injury actions discovery takes the form of a physical examination of the injured party. This is usually done as a matter of course by agreement but the inherent power of the court to order an ordinary physical examination is settled in this jurisdiction. Krook v. Blomberg, 95 N.H. 170, 59 A.2d 482; 8 Wig.Ev. (3rd ed.) § 2220 B (Supp.). The conditions under which the examination is to be made as well as its nature, extent and conduct may be defined by the Trial Court so that proper safeguards exist on behalf of the party examined. Anno. 135 A.L.R. 883; 50 Col.L.R. 1026, 1049. Discovery may even call for an autopsy if good and substantial reasons exist which make the evidence of the autopsy vital. Kusky v. Laderbush, 96 N.H. 286, 74 A.2d 546, 21 A.L.R.2d 536. The development and expansion of discovery in this jurisdiction clearly indicates that the Trial Court has discretionary power to order that a copy of the report of the physical examination be given to the plaintiff if required in the interests of substantial justice under the particular circumstances of any given case. Something more is required of ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Riddle Spring Realty Co. v. State
...three interrogatories, to which the State has now waived its objections, would help the plaintiff in his preparation. Drake v. Bowles, 97 N.H. 471, 472, 92 A.2d 161. The other four questions which the Court ordered the State to answer were: 'Whether the damages awarded to the plaintiff were......
-
McDuffey v. Boston & M.R.R.
...aid for the parties to prepare their case in advance of trial and has been given a broad and liberal interpretation. Drake v. Bowles, 97 N.H. 471, 92 A.2d 161; Town of New Castle v. Rand, 101 N.H. 201, 136 A.2d 914. In encouraging use of discovery and depositions (Krook v. Blomberg, 95 N.H.......
-
Gutbier v. Hannaford Bros. Co.
...adequate and complete remedy at law. Thus, no sufficient reason exists for invoking equity jurisdiction. See also Drake v. Bowles, 97 N.H. 471, 473–74, 92 A.2d 161 (1952).Finally, the plaintiff cites Claire Murray, Inc. v. Reed, 139 N.H. 437, 656 A.2d 822 (1995), for the proposition that an......
- Martin v. Kelley