Strafford v. Welch
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Bill in Equity, for the surrender of an overdue note; signed by the plaintiff and held by the defendant. Facts found by the court. A short time before the note became due, Foye, a selectman of the plaintiff town, called upon the defendant and told him it would not be convenient to pay the note at maturity. The defendant said that the note might remain if the town' would give him a year’s notice when they wished to pay it.
Read the full summary
Bill in Equity, for the surrender of an overdue note; signed by the plaintiff and held by the defendant. Facts found by the court. A short time before the note became due, Foye, a selectman of the plaintiff town, called upon the defendant and told him it would not be convenient to pay the note at maturity. The defendant said that the note might remain if the town' would give him a year’s notice when they wished to pay it. It did not appear that the other selectmen ever knew of or assented to this arrangement. About seven years afterwards, Scott, one of the selectmen, offered .to pay the note,…
1Opinion of the CourtDoe, C. J.
If the selectman, Foye, and the defendant, had agreed that the town should give a year’s notice of payment, that agreement would have been no defence. That contract could not be made for the town by one selectman. Horn v. Whittier, 6 N. H. 88; Henniker v. Wyman, 58 N. H. 528. There was some evidence on the queston whether all the selectmen assented. Glidden v. Unity, 33 N. H. 571, 579. But their assent was not proved. It is one of the facts stated in the reserved case, that the court did not find the assent of two selectmen; and the question of the effect of their assent does not arise. On…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Fellows v. DowSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1876
- Heywood v. HartshornSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1875
- Henniker v. WymanSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1879
3Cited by1 opinion
- Brooks v. HowisonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1885