Sampson v. Burnside
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Trespass quare clausum, for breaking and entering the plaintiff’s close, and digging a deep pit and trench, by means of -which a spring of water, which the plaintiff was accustomed to use for himself and cattle, was destroyed and the plaintiff’s land broken up and injured.
Read the full summary
Trespass quare clausum, for breaking and entering the plaintiff’s close, and digging a deep pit and trench, by means of -which a spring of water, which the plaintiff was accustomed to use for himself and cattle, was destroyed and the plaintiff’s land broken up and injured. The defendant plead the general issue, and filed a brief statement, alleging a parol license to enter on the premises and lay down aqueduct logs to convey water from the same, and at all times thereafter to enter and repair the same. The plaintiff contended that no parol license was sufficient to justify the entry and acts…
1Opinion of the CourtUpham, J.
It is contended in this case that no license or permission can be given by parol to enter upon land and do the acts here named, and that any such license is within the statute of frauds.
This statute provides, that all leases, estates, or interest in land, made by parol, shall have the eifect of leases at will merely, and that “ no action shall be maintained upon any contract for the sale of lands, tenements, or hereditaments, or any interest in or concerning them, unless the agreement upon which such action shall be brought, or some memorandum thereof, be in writing, and signed by the parties…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Cook v. StearnsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1814
- Mumford v. WhitneyNew York Supreme Court · 1836
- Barnes v. BarnesSupreme Court of Vermont · 1834
- Woodbury v. ParshleySuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1834
3Cited by1 opinion
- Colleen M. Auer v. CBCInnovis, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2018