Russ v. Hobbs

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Russ v. Hobbs

61 N.H. 93

DecidedJune 5, 1881

StatusPublished

This text of 61 N.H. 93 (Russ v. Hobbs) 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

Russ v. Hobbs, 61 N.H. 93 (N.H. 1881).

Pincite

Opinion

Doe, C. J.

The promise to extend the time of payment appears to be void for want of consideration. The statement of the written agreement is, that the consideration was the new note, received in payment of the interest due. The case does not show the fact, and there is no legal presumption that the new note for the amount of interest due was given or received as anything but payment, or was more valuable as an investment than the same amount of cash, or that for any reason it was more effective as a consideration than payment of the same amount of money.

Case discharged.

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

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

Doe, C. J.

The promise to extend the time of payment appears to be void for want of consideration. The statement of the written agreement is, that the consideration was the new note, received in payment of the interest due. The case does not show the fact, and there is no legal presumption that the new note for the amount of interest due was given or received as anything but payment, or was more valuable as an investment than the same amount of cash, or that for any reason it was more effective as a consideration than payment of the same amount of money.

Case discharged.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

61 N.H. 93, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/russ-v-hobbs-nh-1881.