Andover v. Grafton
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit. The declaration contained a count upon a promissory note of Grafton, signed by Lovell Kelton as agent: also counts for money had and received, and money paid. At the trial, in the common pleas, the plaintiffs produced a note, as follows : Febk’y 19,1833. Value received, Town of Grafton promises to pay Town of Andover fifty dollars eighty-two cents, on demand and interest. Lovell Kelton, For the selectmen of Grafton.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit. The declaration contained a count upon a promissory note of Grafton, signed by Lovell Kelton as agent: also counts for money had and received, and money paid. At the trial, in the common pleas, the plaintiffs produced a note, as follows : Febk’y 19,1833. Value received, Town of Grafton promises to pay Town of Andover fifty dollars eighty-two cents, on demand and interest. Lovell Kelton, For the selectmen of Grafton. It appeared in evidence, that prior to the date of the note one Barney Saunders, then a resident in the town of Ando-ver, made application to the selectmen of that town…
1Opinion of the CourtParker, J.
Selectmen have not a general authority to bind their town by note, or any other contract. Their authority is limited, and they bind the town only when acting within the scope of it.
They have the power of managing all the prudential affairs of the town. N. H. Laws, 453.
They are specially required, in case of the insufficiency of highway taxes, to cause highways and bridges to be repaired at the charge of the town, so as to render them safe and passable. Ditto, 579. They may of course pledge the credit of the town for the necessary labor and materials, *301and the contract they make will be binding…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Inhabitants of Stoughton v. BakerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1808
- Emerson v. Providence Hat Manufacturing Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1815
- Case of a Turnpike Road ex rel. Chad's Ford to the State LineSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1813
- Kupfer v. Inhabitants of the South Parish in AugustaMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1815
- Sanborn v. Town of DeerfieldSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1820
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Despatch Line of Packets v. Bellamy Man. Co.Superior Court of New Hampshire · 1841
- Carlton v. BathSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1851
- Hanson v. RoweSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1853
- Glidden v. TowleSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1855
- Moor v. WilsonSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1853
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.