Nutting v. Nutting
Opinion
By the terms of the contract it was at Mitchell’s election to pay the plaintiff $50 and interest at any time within two years from the 5th day of May, 1881, or to return the steers at the end of that period. Although the property in the steers remained in the plaintiff, Mitchell was entitled to their custody until the expiration of the 5th day of May, 1883. G. L., c. 1, *222 s. 32; Osgood v. Blake, 21 N. H. 550; Knowlton v. Tilton, 38 N. H. 263; Ricker v. Blanchard, 45 N. H. 39.
The sale by Mitcbell of his interest only in tbe steers was no wrong to tbe plaintiff, and did not terminate tbe bailment. Tbe defendant by bis purchase became entitled to bold them in tbe same manner as Mitchell held tbem. Bailey v. Colby, 34 N. H. 29; McFarland v. Farmer, 42 N. H. 391, 392.
Exceptions overruled.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
63 N.H. 221 (Nutting v. Nutting) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.