Fuller v. Brown

34 A. 463, 67 N.H. 188
Supreme Court of New Hampshire·Decided June 5, 1892·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Blodgett, J.

The question of waiver was properly submitted to the jury on the evidence as a matter of fact; for tlieir determination. “ In a general way, waiver maybe said to occur whenever •one, in possession of a right conferred" either by law or by contract, and knowing the attendant facts, does or forbears to do something inconsistent with the existence of the right, or of his intention to rely upon it; in which case he is said tu have waived it, and he is estopped from claiming by reason of it afterwards.” Bish. C,on., s. 656. But in such a case the question of waiver is one of fact for thl jury. Fox v. Harding, 7 Cush. 516, 520; Union Bank of Georgetown v. Magruder, 7 Pet. 287.

Exception overruled.

Carpenter, J., did not sit: the others concurred.

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

Fuller v. Brown, 34 A. 463, 67 N.H. 188 (N.H. 1892).

34 A. 463 (Fuller v. Brown) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

City of Portsmouth v. Nash
493 A.2d 1163 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1985)
Emery v. Caledonia Sand and Gravel Co.
374 A.2d 929 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1977)
Colby v. Campbell
44 A. 104 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1900)