Town of Walpole v. Town of Marlow
Superior Court of New Hampshire
For what defects irt a declaration judgment must b« arrested, and what defects - ■ are cured hy a verdict* This was an action of assumpsit.
Read the full summary
For what defects irt a declaration judgment must b« arrested, and what defects - ■ are cured hy a verdict* This was an action of assumpsit. It was alleged in the declaration, that the town of Walpole had relieved and maintained one F. M. a páuper, having her legal settlement in the town of Marlow, which was by law chargeable for her support, and had expended in her support $129 71, of which the said town of Marlow had had due notice, &e. and thereby became liable, and in consideration thereof promised, &c. The cause was tried here at May term, 1820, upon the general issue, and a verdict…
1Opinion of the CourtRichardson, C. J.
It is contended in this case that judgment must be arrested, because the declaration does not allege, that the pauper had no relations by law bound to support her. If the title stated in the declaration be defective, the judgment must be arrested. But if this be only an instance of a title defectively stated, the defect is cured by the verdict. The true distinction between a defective title, and a title defectively stated, is this : when any particular fact is essential to the validity of the plaintiff’s title, if such fact is neither expressly stated, in the declaration, nor necessarily…
2Cited by4 opinions
- R. R. v. J. M.Superior Court of New Hampshire · 1825
- Bedell v. StevensSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1853
- Dinsmore v. AuburnSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1853
- Low v. TiltonSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1848