Carlton v. Patterson
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit. The declaration alleged that whereas on, &c., at, &c., the defendant had, by virtue of a writ in favor of E. C. Hutchins against the plaintiff, returnable, &c., attached two horses, &c., the defendant, in consideration that the plaintiff, at his special instance and request, would safely keep said property for him, and would deliver it to him, or any other proper officer, on demand, on receiving reasonable pay for said keeping, and would give a receipt for said…
Read the full summary
Assumpsit. The declaration alleged that whereas on, &c., at, &c., the defendant had, by virtue of a writ in favor of E. C. Hutchins against the plaintiff, returnable, &c., attached two horses, &c., the defendant, in consideration that the plaintiff, at his special instance and request, would safely keep said property for him, and would deliver it to him, or any other proper officer, on demand, on receiving reasonable pay for said keeping, and would give a receipt for said property, with a responsible surety for the keeping and returning of said property as aforesaid, the defendant undertook…
1Opinion of the CourtBell, J.
The principal question presented by this case, relates to the admissibility of the postscript attached to the application for an examination and sale of the property attached by the defendant. To the admission of this postscript the defendant objected, and it was rejected. If we regard this action as pending between Carlton and Patterson alone, this evidence was clearly inadmissible. It was, at most, the declaration of a stranger, by which the defendant could not be bound. It was not a paper requiring any answer on the part of the defendant, so that any inference could be drawn from his…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Sessions v. LittleSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1838
- Baker v. MerrifieldSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1843
3Cited by1 opinion
- Clipper Affiliates, Inc. v. ChecovichSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1994