Flanders v. Thompson
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Whore two magistrates Hinder the acts for the relief of poor debtors discharge a prisoner in execution, their certificate that the creditor has been duly notified»..is not conclusive evidence that, the creditor has had notice. An order of the magistrates in such case upon the creditor to shew cause, left at a house where the creditor had once lived, hut from which he had removed to an-otiter place in this stale, is not a sufficient notice.
Read the full summary
Whore two magistrates Hinder the acts for the relief of poor debtors discharge a prisoner in execution, their certificate that the creditor has been duly notified»..is not conclusive evidence that, the creditor has had notice. An order of the magistrates in such case upon the creditor to shew cause, left at a house where the creditor had once lived, hut from which he had removed to an-otiter place in this stale, is not a sufficient notice. This was an action of debt upon a bond made by the defendants on the 16th January, 1819, with a condition that if Thompson, then a prisoner in the gaol in…
1Opinion of the Court
By the court.
There is no pretence for the supposition that the certificate of the magistrates, is conclusive evidence of notice to Flanders, So far from this, it would not in our opinion be competent evidence to go to a jury to prove that fact.(l) And there is as little pretence that the notice was in this case sufficient. It might as well have been left at any other house in the county as at the house where it was left. Flanders resided within the state, and his attorney in Lancaster. Actual notice might have been given to one of them. There must be
Judgment for the plaintiff,
2Cited by2 opinions
- Banks v. JohnsonSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1841
- Woods v. BlodgettSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1844