Farmer v. Stewart
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Where a submission is made to arbitrators by a written agreement, a surety in the agreement need not be notified of the sitting of the arbitrators. The owners of land, over which a highway is contemplated, have a right to object to the acceptance of the report of a committee laying it out; and a forbearance of this right by them is a good consideration fora promise.
Read the full summary
Where a submission is made to arbitrators by a written agreement, a surety in the agreement need not be notified of the sitting of the arbitrators. The owners of land, over which a highway is contemplated, have a right to object to the acceptance of the report of a committee laying it out; and a forbearance of this right by them is a good consideration fora promise. The judgment, accepting such report, is no bar to an action on a promise made a® aforesaid to pay such sum in damage as arbitrators may award over and above what was assessed in the report. Each owner may sustain a separate action…
1Opinion of the Court
Woodbury, J.,
delivered the opinion of the court. ?(1) Gild. Ev. 527.-1 Maul’ & Selw. 250. (2)14 John, 188, 387* (3) 13 mass Rep 298.
Although the defendants in this case signed only one agreement with all the owners of land over which the highway ran ; yet the interest of those owners was in separate parcels, and the sums awarded to them were separate. J fence this action is well brought in the name of one alone for the specific sum awarded to him. 1 Saund. 153-4, note (1).—1 Chitt. Pl. 6, 8,—1 East 226, 497.-2 D. & E. 282.— 3 B. & P. 235.-2 Com. C. 187.—5 Es. Ca. 193.— Yelv. 177, a. note.—8…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Commonwealth v. Inhabitants of WestboroughMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1807
- Lazell v. MillerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1818
- Smith v. WhitingMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1814
- Cobb v. CurtissNew York Supreme Court · 1811
3Cited by1 opinion
- Snow v. PrescottSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1842