Maltais v. Foss

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Maltais v. Foss

44 A. 599, 68 N.H. 404

DecidedDecember 5, 1895

StatusPublished

This text of 44 A. 599 (Maltais v. Foss) 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.

Bluebook

Maltais v. Foss, 44 A. 599, 68 N.H. 404 (N.H. 1895).

Pincite

Opinion

Clark, J.

The only question is whether there was error in the denial of the motion for a nonsuit. The plaintiff’s evidence tended to show that “the defendant had the lumber and bark for the cutting of which suit was brought.” From this, the jury could properly infer that the defendant accepted and took the benefit of the plaintiff’s labor at the agreed price; or at its value, if, as the plaintiff in his brief asserts, there was a quantum meruit count.

Judgment on the verdict.

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

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

Clark, J.

The only question is whether there was error in the denial of the motion for a nonsuit. The plaintiff’s evidence tended to show that “the defendant had the lumber and bark for the cutting of which suit was brought.” From this, the jury could properly infer that the defendant accepted and took the benefit of the plaintiff’s labor at the agreed price; or at its value, if, as the plaintiff in his brief asserts, there was a quantum meruit count.

Judgment on the verdict.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

44 A. 599, 68 N.H. 404, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/maltais-v-foss-nh-1895.