Hill v. Boutell
3 N.H. 502
Opinion
It is well settled, that in an action for use and occupation, when an express promise to pay is shewn, the defendant cannot be permitted to controvert the title of the [503]*503plaintiff. Buller's N. P. 139.—1 Chitty's Pl. 575.—1 Wilson 314, Lewis vs. Willis.—5 D. & E. 4, Cook vs. Loxley.
We are therefore of opinion, that there must be
J1 new trial granted.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Hill v. Boutell, 3 N.H. 502 (N.H. Super. Ct. 1826).
3 N.H. 502 (Hill v. Boutell) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Hatch v. Bullock
57 N.H. 15 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1876)