Legal Opinion

Hurd v. Varney

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided January 2, 1929PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBranch, J.

Under our statute no action can be maintained against an executor or administrator unless the demand has been exhibited to him within one year after the original grant of administration. P. L., c. 302, ss. 1, 3. But it is also provided that “a notice sent to the administrator or his agent by registered mail, setting forth the nature and amount of the claim and a demand for payment, shall be deemed a sufficient exhibition and demand.” Ib., s. 2. In accordance with the foregoing provisions, it is a well-established rule “that proof of notice is to be affirmatively established at the trial as a…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Wise v. OuttrimSupreme Court of Iowa · 1908

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Wunderlich v. HoltMontana Supreme Court · 1929
  2. Lunderville v. MorseSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1972
  3. Edelstone v. Salmon Falls Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1930
  4. State Ex Rel. Steinfort v. District CourtMontana Supreme Court · 1939
  5. Keith v. WintersSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1944

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API