Rowell v. Hollis

62 N.H. 129
Supreme Court of New Hampshire·Decided June 5, 1882·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

The machine was the property of the plaintiffs, whether the agreement is regarded as a lease or as a conditional sale. The title would not pass until the price was paid in full. Upon a demand of payment, and a refusal to comply within a reasonable time, or to deliver up the machine, the plaintiffs had a right to replevy it. Bailey v. Colby, 34 N.H. 29; Singer M'f'g Co. v. Graham, 8 Oreg. 17 — S.C., 34 Am. Rep. 572.

Exceptions overruled.

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

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

Rowell v. Hollis, 62 N.H. 129 (N.H. 1882).

62 N.H. 129 (Rowell v. Hollis) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Parker v. New Boston
104 A. 345 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1918)