Smart v. Gale

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Smart v. Gale

62 N.H. 699

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Smart v. Gale. Read the opinion of the Court — 62 N.H. 62 →

Supreme Court of New Hampshire·Decided June 5, 1883·Published

Opinion

Doe, C. J.

Since the decision (62 N. H. 62) that the plaintiff could not recover on the count for money had and received, he has been allowed to amend the declaration by adding a count in case for deceit, and a referee has found for the plaintiff; and in an action of debt, the referee has found a breach of the bond declared on.

Judgment for the plaintiff in loth suits.

Allen, 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.

Since the decision (62 N. H. 62) that the plaintiff could not recover on the count for money had and received, he has been allowed to amend the declaration by adding a count in case for deceit, and a referee has found for the plaintiff; and in an action of debt, the referee has found a breach of the bond declared on.

Judgment for the plaintiff in loth suits.

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

Smart v. Gale, 62 N.H. 699 (N.H. 1883).

Pincite

62 N.H. 699 (Smart v. Gale) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related