Ackerman v. Middleby
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Covenant Broken. Trial by a referee. Transferred from the May term, 1910, of the superior court by Plummer, J. The writ is dated September 8, 1904. On November 23, 1905, the plaintiff was allowed to amend the declaration by adding a count in quantum meruit for work done, materials furnished, and money paid out for the defendants.
Read the full summary
Covenant Broken. Trial by a referee. Transferred from the May term, 1910, of the superior court by Plummer, J. The writ is dated September 8, 1904. On November 23, 1905, the plaintiff was allowed to amend the declaration by adding a count in quantum meruit for work done, materials furnished, and money paid out for the defendants. The referee found that on June 15, 1904, the plaintiff leased of the defendants a certain farm with tools and live stock, for a term of nine and one half months, or until April 15, 1905. The plaintiff carried on the farm until September 8, 1904, when without…
1Opinion of the CourtWalker, J.
If it is conceded that the facts as reported show a liability on the part of the defendants to recompense the plaintiff for” his loss, upon the theory of quantum meruit (Britton v. Turner, 6 N. H. 481; Meredith etc. Ass’n v. Drill Co., 66 N. H. 539), it does not follow that he is entitled to recover therefor in this action, which was begun several months before the time fixed in the lease for the termination of the contract and the final settlement between the parties. It is familiar law that no recovery can be had upon a cause of action that arises after the suit was brought (Tappan v.…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Lee v. DowSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1902
- Meredith Mechanic Ass'n v. American Twist Drill Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1891
3Cited by1 opinion
- George W. Blanchard & Son Co. v. American Realty Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1919