Harris v. Rounsevel
This text of 61 N.H. 250 (Harris v. Rounsevel) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Hampshire primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Sending the sacks for the wool was a preparation made by the plaintiffs for completing the purchase. Tlie preparation was not beneficial to the defendant, was not a service for the payment of which his promise can be implied from the facts stated, and was not one of the statutory conditions that would give validity to the contract of sale. G. L., e. 220, s. 16; C. A. Association v. B. & M. Railroad, 59 N. H. 312, 314. Notice may generally be waived. Lyman v. Littleton, 50 N. 42. In legal proceedings, a party may waive an objection by not presenting it seasonably. State v. Richmond, 26 N. H. 232, 247; Boyce v. Railroad, 43 N. H. 627. The defendant presented his defence in court at his first opportunity. The legislature intended that such a contract should not be'valid, and that its invalidity should not be waived by such oral statements as were made in this case.] j
Case discharged.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
61 N.H. 250, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harris-v-rounsevel-nh-1881.