Dame v. Wood
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Motion, by the plaintiff, to be relieved from the agreement on which this ease was submitted when it was previously before the court (73 N. H. 222, 391). Hearing before Stone, J., by whom the case was transferred from the November term, 1906, of the superior court.
Read the full summary
Motion, by the plaintiff, to be relieved from the agreement on which this ease was submitted when it was previously before the court (73 N. H. 222, 391). Hearing before Stone, J., by whom the case was transferred from the November term, 1906, of the superior court. Although both the plaintiff and his cóunsel knew of the facts which they say show that “ the parties understood that the plaintiff’s performance of the contract was accepted from day to day as-the work progressed,” the plaintiff acted by advice of counsel, and neither of them knew, or ought to have known, that those facts were…
1Opinion of the CourtYoung, J.
It can be found from the fact that a person fails to act because of a mistake of his counsel, that he was prevented from acting by accident, mistake, or misfortune (Grout v. Cole, 57 N. H. 547; Bolles v. Dalton, 59 N. H. 479, 480; Kelsea v. Manchester, 64 N. H. 570; Harvey v. Northwood, 65 N. H. 117; Cossar v. Truesdale, 69 N. H. 490; Parsons v. Durham, 70 N. H. 44; Gunnison v. Abbott, 73 N. H. 590, 592); so there was evidence to .sustain the court’s finding, which is the only question of law raised by the defendant’s exception.
Exception overruled.
All concurred.
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Parsons v. DurhamSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1899
- Bolles v. DaltonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1879
- Harvey v. NorthwoodSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1889
- Kelsea v. ManchesterSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1888
- Grout v. ColeSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1876
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.