Hoag v. Hoag
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit, before Smith, J., at the October term, 1874. The plaintiff sues in his individual capacity. The plaintiff is administrator of the estate of Alpheus B. Hoag, deceased. The estate is represented as insolvent. The principal defendant, Charles E. Hoag, presented his claim against the estate to the commissioner, who allowed the same. The commissioner’s report has been accepted, but the time for appealing therefrom has not yet expired.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit, before Smith, J., at the October term, 1874. The plaintiff sues in his individual capacity. The plaintiff is administrator of the estate of Alpheus B. Hoag, deceased. The estate is represented as insolvent. The principal defendant, Charles E. Hoag, presented his claim against the estate to the commissioner, who allowed the same. The commissioner’s report has been accepted, but the time for appealing therefrom has not yet expired. In the trustee clause of the writ the officer is commanded “ to attach the money, goods, chattels, rights, and credits of the said defendant in the hands…
1Concurrence
The case at bar is precisely like the case of Blaisdell Page v. Ladd, and Page, Tr., 14 N.H. 129, except that, here, the motion to dismiss is made by the principal defendant, and there, it was made by a subsequent attaching creditor — a distinction without a difference so far as affects the general principle that an action at law cannot be maintained by a person against himself. That principle admits of no violation. It makes no difference that the plaintiff in a certain capacity is the defendant in a different capacity. "One of the results of rendering a judgment against the trustee in this…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Swamscot Machine Co. v. PartridgeSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1852
- Blaisdell v. LaddSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1843
- Brown v. WarrenSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1862