Singer Manufacturing Co. v. Bullard

62 N.H. 129
Supreme Court of New Hampshire·Decided June 15, 1882·Published

Opinion

Clark, J.

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

Singer Manufacturing Co. v. Bullard, 62 N.H. 129 (N.H. 1882).

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

Related

Singer Manufacturing Co. v. Graham
8 Or. 17 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1879)