Tabor v. Harriman

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Tabor v. Harriman

59 N.H. 226

DecidedJune 5, 1879

StatusPublished

This text of 59 N.H. 226 (Tabor v. Harriman) 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

Tabor v. Harriman, 59 N.H. 226 (N.H. 1879).

Pincite

Opinion

Stanley, J.

Vandyke had a lien on the logs for driving them. 2 Kent Com. 635, and notes; Jacobs v. Knapp, 50 N. H. 71, 76. That lien the defendant was compelled to discharge before he could have the plaintiffs’ logs to apply on his contract with Vandyke. Having discharged it, the amount paid for that purpose was money paid, laid out, and expended for the plaintiffs, and was proper matter of defence against their claim for pay for the logs. Upon the facts stated, the defendant is entitled to

Judgment on the report.

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

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

Stanley, J.

Vandyke had a lien on the logs for driving them. 2 Kent Com. 635, and notes; Jacobs v. Knapp, 50 N. H. 71, 76. That lien the defendant was compelled to discharge before he could have the plaintiffs’ logs to apply on his contract with Vandyke. Having discharged it, the amount paid for that purpose was money paid, laid out, and expended for the plaintiffs, and was proper matter of defence against their claim for pay for the logs. Upon the facts stated, the defendant is entitled to

Judgment on the report.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

59 N.H. 226, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tabor-v-harriman-nh-1879.