Felch v. Harriman
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Trover, for apples grown on land of the defendant, which, under a parol agreement between the parties, was used by the plaintiff for pasturing his cattle for five years from the spring of 1881. Verdict for the plaintiff. It was in dispute whether the agreement was a leasing of the land for pasturage, or an undertaking to pasture the plaintiff’s cattle there for a stipulated yearly price.
Read the full summary
Trover, for apples grown on land of the defendant, which, under a parol agreement between the parties, was used by the plaintiff for pasturing his cattle for five years from the spring of 1881. Verdict for the plaintiff. It was in dispute whether the agreement was a leasing of the land for pasturage, or an undertaking to pasture the plaintiff’s cattle there for a stipulated yearly price. The defendant from year to year picked the apples and carried them away, which constitutes the conversion alleged. The defendant requested the court to instruct the jury that if the pasture was leased, it was…
1Opinion of the CourtBlodgett, J.
The verdict in this case must bo taken as a finding by.the jury, upon competent evidence, that the relation of landlord and tenant existed between the parties as to the pasture at the time of the conversion complained of, and that both understood the apples in controversy were included in the pasturage. This understanding of the parties is of course conclusive upon the question of the plaintiff’s right to the apples; but without it, his right to them would be none the less valid, because as tenant at will of the pasture he was entitled to its annual fruits, of which the apples were one.
The…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Ping v. KershawSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1923
- Tuttle v. LangleySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1896