Demeritt v. Miles
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit. Tbe declaration alleges, that the defendant, on the 25th of October, 1844, by his note of that date, for value received, promised J. Y. Demeritt, then living, to pay him, or his order, $150, on demand, with interest, &c. On the general issue, the execution of the note declared on, was admitted.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit. Tbe declaration alleges, that the defendant, on the 25th of October, 1844, by his note of that date, for value received, promised J. Y. Demeritt, then living, to pay him, or his order, $150, on demand, with interest, &c. On the general issue, the execution of the note declared on, was admitted. In his defence, the defendant introduced evidence designed and tending to show that the note was without any consideration, and was given for the purpose of preventing the creditors of Miles from attaching and wasting his property in costs, until he could sell and dispose of the same, and…
1Opinion of the CourtGilchrist, C. J.
In this case the verdict for the defendant has established the fact that the note in suit was given for the purpose of delaying the creditors of the defendant. Of this fact both the defendant and the plaintiff’s intestate were conusant. If the intestate could not have alleged that the defendant was estopped, the administrator cannot; as he is privy in law to the intestate.
Could the intestate have recovered the note ? He could not have said that he was misled, or that he was induced to alter his position in any way, by the fact that the note was without *527consideration. He would have sought to…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Southerin v. MendumSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1831
- Mann v. LockeSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1840
- Canfield v. MongerNew York Supreme Court · 1815
- Zeely v. YansenNew York Supreme Court · 1807