Page v. Snell
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit, for services in nursing, and for boarding the defendant’s testate. When the services were rendered, the plaintiff’s husband, a son of the deceased, was his tenant, managing his farm upon shares. They all occupied the same house, the deceased living apart from the others constituting a separate family. The referee found an “ implied promise of the deceased to pay for the services,” and awarded damages. Judgment was ordered on the report, and the defendant excepted.
1Opinion of the CourtAllen, J.
If the referee, in finding an “ implied promise,” intended to find that, from the facts stated, a promise resulted as a conclusive presumption of law, the finding was erroneous. Bickford v. Dane, 58 N. H. 185; Savings-Bank v. Getchell, ante 281. It is more natural and probable that by the phrase “implied promise” the referee intended to convey the idea that the testator made no express promise to pay the plaintiff, but, from the benefits he received from the services and other facts proved, a promise or understanding on his part that he was to pay was inferred. A promise or contract found by…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Bickford v. DaneSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1877
3Cited by4 opinions
- McConnell v. LamontagneSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1926
- Cox v. CoxSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1904
- Clark v. SanbornSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1895
- Dufton v. Mechanicks National BankSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1948