Hatch v. Bullock
This text of 57 N.H. 15 (Hatch v. Bullock) 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.
Opinions
FROM GRAFTON CIRCUIT COURT. There is no pretence that there has been a determination of the plaintiff's title since the letting, or an eviction, either actual or constructive, by one having a title paramount to that of the plaintiff. It is not claimed that the letting took place, or that rent has been paid by the defendant, under a mistake or misapprehension of the state of the title, much less by reason of any misrepresentation or fraud on the part of the plaintiff. I think the defendant is estopped, in this action for the recovery of rent, to deny the plaintiff's title. See 6 Am. Law Rev. 1; Bigelow on Estoppel 372, et seq.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
57 N.H. 15, 1876 N.H. LEXIS 44, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hatch-v-bullock-nh-1876.