Davis v. Sanders
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit, to recover the price of a threshing machine, alleged to have been sold the defendant by the plaintiff. It appeared, that before the alleged sale to the defendant, the machine had been sold by the plaintiff to one Buzzell, and the plaintiff contended that, by the agreement of all parties, the contract of sale to Buzzell had been rescinded, and that the defendant became the purchaser.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit, to recover the price of a threshing machine, alleged to have been sold the defendant by the plaintiff. It appeared, that before the alleged sale to the defendant, the machine had been sold by the plaintiff to one Buzzell, and the plaintiff contended that, by the agreement of all parties, the contract of sale to Buzzell had been rescinded, and that the defendant became the purchaser. Drake, a witness for the plaintiff, testified that he, as a deputy sheriff, had an execution against Buzzell in favor of one Barker ; and that Barker, wishing to levy upon the machine as the property of…
1Opinion of the CourtGilchrist, J.
The cases where the acts or admissions of a party are adjudged to operate against him, byway of estop-pel, as an estoppel in pais, are generally cases where, in good conscience and honest dealing, he ought not to be permitted to gainsay them. And as a general rule, a party will be concluded from denying his own acts or admissions, which were expressly designed to influence the conduct of another, and did so influence it, and when such denial will operate to the injury of the latter. Welland Canal Co. vs. Hathaway, 4 Wend. 483. Thus, where the plaintiffs, by their attorney, called upon the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- M'Allister v. ReabNew York Supreme Court · 1830
- Morris v. Lessee of Josiah Harmer's HeirsSupreme Court of the United States · 1833
3Cited by3 opinions
- Brown v. ManterSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1851
- Clement v. BrooksSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1842
- Pecker v. HoitSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1844