Giles v. School District No. 14
Superior Court of New Hampshire
This was an action of assumpsit, to recover the sum of eighty-three cents, charged by the plaintiff for that amount paid for finding and setting two squares of glass in the window, and for finding and putting on a lock on the outside door of the school house of said district, in November, 1852. The sum of twenty-five cents was duly tendered by the defendants for the repairs on the window, and was received by the plaintiff in part.
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit, to recover the sum of eighty-three cents, charged by the plaintiff for that amount paid for finding and setting two squares of glass in the window, and for finding and putting on a lock on the outside door of the school house of said district, in November, 1852. The sum of twenty-five cents was duly tendered by the defendants for the repairs on the window, and was received by the plaintiff in part. It was in evidence that in 1851, A. W. Brown was the prudential committee for the district; that he removed from the district in December, 1851. No meeting of the…
1Opinion of the CourtBell, J.
The office of prudential committee became vacant by the removal of the incumbent from town, in December, 1851. Barre v. Greenwich, 1 Pick. 129, cited in Rumsey v. Campton, 10 N. H. Rep. 567. The plaintiff was appointed by the selectmen, and took the oath of office, and his appointment and oath were properly recorded, before the 23d of April, 1852, and no objections are suggested to the regularity of these proceedings. As prudential committee he was authorized “ to make such occasional repairs in the school house and furniture as may be necessary, not exceeding in amount five per cent, of the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Rumney v. CamptonSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1840
3Cited by2 opinions
- Reitveld v. NORTHERN WYOMING COMMUNITY COL. DIST.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1959
- Beattie v. HilliardSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1875