Adams v. Hackett
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit, on a promissory note, dated on the tenth day of August, 1849, and payable to J. G. Bancroft & Co., of whom the plaintiff is the surviving partner, for the sum of $25. Under the third count in the declaration, the plaintiff filed a specification, being a bill of items amounting to the sum of $114,62, all of which was for liquors, except the sum of $6,90. The balance due, according to the specification, was $27,18. The action was committed to an auditor, who made a…
Read the full summary
Assumpsit, on a promissory note, dated on the tenth day of August, 1849, and payable to J. G. Bancroft & Co., of whom the plaintiff is the surviving partner, for the sum of $25. Under the third count in the declaration, the plaintiff filed a specification, being a bill of items amounting to the sum of $114,62, all of which was for liquors, except the sum of $6,90. The balance due, according to the specification, was $27,18. The action was committed to an auditor, who made a report, of which the following is the substance. The auditor found due upon the note, including interest, the sum of…
1Opinion of the CourtEastman, J.
As we understand the declaration in this case, it is founded upon promises made to the plaintiff as surviving partner of the firm of J. G. Bancroft & Co., and as surviving partner of the firm of G. A. & J. Q,. Adams, and also upon promises to the plaintiff, in his individual capacity. And the objection is taken by the defendant that these are different causes of action, which cannot be joined in one suit.
We suppose the objection is, not that the causes of action are of a different nature, and therefore cannot be joined, but *292that they accrue in different rights; that is, that here is a cause…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- President of the Goshen & Minisink Turnpike Road v. HurtinNew York Supreme Court · 1812
- Dow v. NorrisSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1827
- Horn v. FullerSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1834