Legal Opinion

Peters v. Dickinson

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided December 5, 1892Published

Bill in Equity, by a creditor of William R. Bullock, who has recovered judgment against him and levied on certain land as his, and now seeks to enforce an oral agreement of one Ansel Dickinson to convey the land to Bullock. Ansel Dickinson is dead, and the defendant is administratrix of his estate. The land was occupied by Bullock at the time of Ansel’s purchase, and has been occupied by him ever since. Facts found by a referee.

1Opinion of the CourtClark, J.

Bullock was living on the farm when Dickinson bought it. It was agreed between them that he might remain on the place without paying rent; that he and his boys might cut the lumber upon the farm, Dickinson furnishing what additional help was needed, and paying bills incident to cutting and marketing the lumber, so far as the work was done by others than the Bullock family; and that Dickinson would use or sell the lumber, and give Bullock the privilege of buying the place by paying an amount.that would make Dickinson whole. It was an arrangement to enable Bullock to purchase the farm for what…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Howe v. DaySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1879

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API