Jewell v. Gilbert
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit. Facts found by a referee. The plaintiff furnished the defendant with supplies toward hauling wood, and claimed a lien under Gen. Laws, c. 189, s. 18. The Grand Trunk .Railway Company appeared as claimant of the wood, and objected to the rendition of a judgment in rem, on the ground that a lien had not been secured by attachment. The attachment was made by Graham, whose appointment as a special deputy for the service and return of the writ was. not under seal.
1Opinion of the CourtDoe, C. J.
“The defacto doctrine was introduced into the law as a matter of policy and necessity, to protect the interests of the public and individuals, where those interests were involved in the official acts of persons exercising the duties of an office, without being lawful officers. It was seen * * * that the public could not reasonably be compelled to inquire into the title of an officer, nor be compelled to show a title, and these became settled principles in the law. But to protect those who dealt with such officers when apparent incumbents of offices under such apparent circumstances of…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Luther v. BordenSupreme Court of the United States · 1849
- State v. CarrollSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1871
- Texas v. WhiteSupreme Court of the United States · 1869
- The Brig Amy WarwickSupreme Court of the United States · 1862
- Fowler v. BebeeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1812
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Powell v. Fidelity & Deposit Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1932
- Oakland Paving Co. v. DonovanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1912
- Bunten v. DavisSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1926
- Beckman v. SoutherSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1895
- Maverick Oil Company v. HansonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1892
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.