Smart v. Gale

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

Opinion

Clark, J.

The plaintiff seeks to recover the value of the fixtures on the ground of a failure of consideration. This is not a case of a payment made upon a legal consideration which has wholly failed, and may therefore be recovered back. Leach v. Tilton, 40 N. H. 473, 475. There was no separate valuation of the fixtures, and no offer to return them. Weeks v. Robie, 42 N. H. 316. The contract was entire, and has never been rescinded, and the action cannot be maintained. Way v. Cutting, 17 N. H. 450; Miner v. Bradley, 22 Pick. 457; Clark v. Baker, 5 Met. 452; Bassett v. Percival, 5 Allen 345.

Judgment for the (defendant.

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

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

Smart v. Gale, 62 N.H. 62 (N.H. 1882).

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

Related

Smart v. Gale
62 N.H. 699 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1883)