Glidden v. Towle
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit, under the statute for one half of two bills of fees paid by the plaintiff to the fence-viewers, for two different divisions of fences between the plaintiff and the defendant, as awarded by the fence-viewers. On the trial, it appeared that the applications by the plaintiff to the fence-viewers, for the divisions, were in writing, but were never recorded in the town records with the other papers in the eases.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit, under the statute for one half of two bills of fees paid by the plaintiff to the fence-viewers, for two different divisions of fences between the plaintiff and the defendant, as awarded by the fence-viewers. On the trial, it appeared that the applications by the plaintiff to the fence-viewers, for the divisions, were in writing, but were never recorded in the town records with the other papers in the eases. The plaintiff having satisfactorily accounted for not producing the original, was allowed to offer parol evidence of their contents. The proceedings in the two cases of division…
1Opinion of the CourtEastman, J.
By section 14, chapter 136, of the Revised Statutes, it is provided that “ each fence-viewer shall be allowed one dollar per day for his services, to be paid by the party making the application, and he shall be entitled to demand and recover the one-half thereof of the other party, in an action of assumpsit for money paid for his use, unless, in the opinion of the fence-viewers, justice requires a different division of the costs, in which case they may so order.” *162Upon this section, the present action is founded, the plaintiff having paid the fence-viewers for making a division of certain…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Case of a Turnpike Road ex rel. Chad's Ford to the State LineSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1813
- Despatch Line of Packets v. Bellamy Man. Co.Superior Court of New Hampshire · 1841
- Andover v. GraftonSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1834
- York v. DavisSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1840