Williams v. Hastings
Opinion
At the time of making the contract to move the defendant’s goods, the plaintiff contemplated a part performance of it on Sunday, and the subsequent performance was in part on that day. The removal of the goods was not a work of necessity or mercy, and therefore the contract, being in violation of Gen. St., c. 255, s. 3, was illegal. The contract being entire, the plaintiff cannot recover for the labor performed on Saturday and Monday. Kidder v. Blake, 45 N. H; 530; Bixby v. Moor, 51 N. H. 402.
Judgment for the defendant.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
59 N.H. 373 (Williams v. Hastings) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.