Willoughby v. Holderness

62 N.H. 661
CourtSupreme Court of New Hampshire
DecidedJune 5, 1883
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 62 N.H. 661 (Willoughby v. Holderness) 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
Willoughby v. Holderness, 62 N.H. 661 (N.H. 1883).

Opinion

Smith, J.

The plaintiff cannot recover. William Gale had no authority to surrender the Lee note and take a note payable to himself. There is a total failure of consideration. A judgment in this suit would not bind Lee’s administrator, if one should be appointed, nor prevent his recovery upon the original note. When an administrator of Lee’s estate is appointed, he may be made plaintiff instead of Willoughby. Hazen v. Quimby, 61 N. H. 76; Buckminster v. Wright, 59 N. H. 153; Boudreau v. Eastman, 59 N. H. 467; Chauncy v. Ins. Co., 60 N. H. 428.

Case discharged.

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

An administrator upon the estate of Lee was subsequently appointed, who came in, and was substituted for Willoughby as plaintiff, and, on a count for money had and received, judgment was rendered against the defendants for the amount due on the Lee note.

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

Related

National Marine Underwriters, Inc. v. McCormack
634 A.2d 1008 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1993)
Atwood v. Berry
179 A. 412 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1935)
State Ex Rel. Thorndike v. Collins
36 A. 550 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1894)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
62 N.H. 661, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/willoughby-v-holderness-nh-1883.