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…
1Opinion of the Court
The case of Blaisdell v. Ladd, 14 N.H. 129, seems to be an authority quite in point that this plaintiff; in his individual capacity, cannot have judgment against himself as trustee in the capacity of administrator of the estate of Alpheus B. Hoag. The plaintiff's counsel endeavor to distinguish the two cases on the ground that in Blaisdell v. Ladd the objection was taken by a subsequent attaching creditor. I cannot see, however, that this makes any difference; and whether it does or not, the circumstance was not alluded to by the court, the decision being based upon the general proposition…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Blaisdell v. LaddSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1843
3Cited by3 opinions
- Morrison v. MorrisonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1926
- Woodward v. TupperSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1879
- Bryan v. KalesSupreme Court of the United States · 1890