Danforth v. Dewey

3 N.H. 79

Opinion

By the court.

In this case, the plaintiff purchased of the defendant two ploughs ; and, in an adjustment of accounts between the parties, the value of the ploughs was allowed to the defendant; yet he has refused to deliver the ploughs, and has converted them to his own use. It is objected, by the:defendant, that this action cannot be maintained upon these facts. But we think otherwise. It seems to us, that when the defendant refused to deliver the ploughs, the plaintiff had a right to consider the contract as rescinded, and to recover back the price he had paid for the ploughs. 5 John. 85, Gillet vs. Maynard.—12 John. 274, Raymond vs. Barnard.

And it seems to us, that this plaintiff may recover upon his count, for money had and received, the price of the ploughs, Í* is not necessary, in order to support that count, that the defendant should have received money. It is enough, that he received money’s worth. 2 N. H. Rep. 333, Willie vs. Green.

Judgment on the verdict.