Allen v. Woodward
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit, ia two counts. The first count was on the following account annexed to the plaintiff’s writ: “ Jacob Woodward to Samuel R. Allen, Dr. April, 1850. To thirty-five sixty-ninth parts of 360 spruce and hemlock logs, taken from the common rights of land in Conway, in the winter of 1849 and 1850, of which the said Allen owns thirty-five of the sixty-nine rights, making 182 logs, worth sixty-five dollars, f65.00.” The second count was as follows: “ Also, for that the…
Read the full summary
Assumpsit, ia two counts. The first count was on the following account annexed to the plaintiff’s writ: “ Jacob Woodward to Samuel R. Allen, Dr. April, 1850. To thirty-five sixty-ninth parts of 360 spruce and hemlock logs, taken from the common rights of land in Conway, in the winter of 1849 and 1850, of which the said Allen owns thirty-five of the sixty-nine rights, making 182 logs, worth sixty-five dollars, f65.00.” The second count was as follows: “ Also, for that the said defendant, at said Conway, on the ninth day of April, A. D. 1850, in consideration that the plaintiff, being the owner…
1Opinion of the CourtBeli, J.
The second count is bad. The consideration as stated is past. Lawes PI. 62, 63; 1 Saund. Rep. 264, n. 1; Comstock v. Smith, 7 Johns. 88. The act of taking the logs as alleged seems to have been a trespass. If it had been alleged that the trees were cut and carried away by the assent and pérmission of the plaintiff, the count would be sufficient, and proof *547of the settlement would be admissible as evidence of such assent, if the plaintiff appeared to be a tenant in common of the land; because a ratification or subsequent approval is equivalent to a previous assent. Ratihabitio retrotrahitur…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Atkinson v. BemisSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1840