Abbott v. Smith

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Abbott v. Smith

17 A. 410, 64 N.H. 615

Supreme Court of New Hampshire·Decided June 5, 1887·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Bingham, J.

The sum due the defendant for his labor at the date of the service of the writ was less than twenty dollars. It does not appear that the claim on which the suit is founded is *616 for necessaries. The trustees are not chargeable, regardless of the question of the validity of the assignment. G . L., c. 249, s. 40.

Osgood & Prescott, for the plaintiff. J. H. Andrews, for the claimants.

Exceptions overruled.

Doe, C. J., was absent; Smith, J., did not sit: the others concurred.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Bingham, J.

The sum due the defendant for his labor at the date of the service of the writ was less than twenty dollars. It does not appear that the claim on which the suit is founded is *616 for necessaries. The trustees are not chargeable, regardless of the question of the validity of the assignment. G . L., c. 249, s. 40.

Osgood & Prescott, for the plaintiff. J. H. Andrews, for the claimants.

Exceptions overruled.

Doe, C. J., was absent; Smith, J., did not sit: the others concurred.

Abbott v. Smith, 17 A. 410, 64 N.H. 615 (N.H. 1887).

Pincite

17 A. 410 (Abbott v. Smith) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related