Luther v. Cote
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit, on a promissory note signed by the defendants. Facts found by referees. “Austin A. Cote did promise as alleged, etc. In reference to tbe other defendant, we find that said Ida A. Cote was born September 3, 1854; was married to said Austin A. in 1870, and was divorced from him in 1878. In June, 1875, said Austin A. went to tbe plaintiff’s residence and looked at a three-year-old colt, and wanted to buy it of the plaintiff on credit.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit, on a promissory note signed by the defendants. Facts found by referees. “Austin A. Cote did promise as alleged, etc. In reference to tbe other defendant, we find that said Ida A. Cote was born September 3, 1854; was married to said Austin A. in 1870, and was divorced from him in 1878. In June, 1875, said Austin A. went to tbe plaintiff’s residence and looked at a three-year-old colt, and wanted to buy it of the plaintiff on credit. The plaintiff declined to sell tbe colt to said Austin A., on a credit to him. The colt was then taken to where the defendants lived, at West…
1Opinion of the CourtBlodgett, J.
At the time the conditional note was given, the defendant Ida could not legally contract, except in respect to her separate estate (Gen. Sts., c. 164, s. 13); and as, by the contract, the colt was to remain the plaintiff’s until paid for, and as it has never been paid for, it is obvious that the title did not pass to Ida (Holt v. Holt, 58 N. H. 276), and consequently that the contract was not one in respect to her separate property. In the view most unfavorable to her, she was, at most, simply the conditional vendee of the colt, and held it as bailee of the vendor (King v. Bates, 57 N. H.…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- King v. BatesSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1876
- Holt v. HoltSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1878
3Cited by2 opinions
- Parsons v. McLaneSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1887
- Stone v. SleeperSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1882