Grafton,
Dec. 4, 1917.
A telephone company’s books, containing its loll charges, were outside the jurisdiction: in an action by a subscriber against a third person the bill rendered for tolls was admitted.
Assumpsit, for lumber sold and delivered. Trial by the court and verdict for the plaintiffs. Their agent testified that the sale *518was made by telephone and they were permitted to introduce a bill from the telephone company showing a charge for connecting the plaintiffs with the telephone in the defendant’s place of business on the day the sale was made. Transferred by Branch, J., from the May term, 1917, of the superior court on the defendant’s exception to the admission of the telephone bill and to the denial of his motion for a directed verdict.
Fred S. Wright, for the plaintiffs.
David A. Pingree (of Vermont) and David F. Dudley, for the defendant.
It would have been permissible for the plaintiffs to show the charge the telephone company made for connecting them with the defendant’s place of business by the books of the company, Lassone v. Railroad, 66 N. H. 345; Roberts v. Rice, 69 N. H. 472; and since the books were in Vermont the court could permit the plaintiffs to show the charge in the way they did. Roberts v. Company, ante, 491. This.disposes of both of the defendant’s exceptions.
Exceptions overruled.
All concurred.
78 N.H. 517
Nothing yet... Still searching!
Nothing yet... Still searching!