Olmstead v. Niles
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Trespass for taking and carrying away the plaintiff’s white pine timber. The cause was tried upon the general issue, in the common pleas, and a verdict taken for the plaintiff, subject to the opinion of this court upon the following case. Austin Ladd, being owner of lot number 13, in the first range of seventy aere lots, in Haverhill, executed to the plaintiff a writing in these words— “Haverhill.
Read the full summary
Trespass for taking and carrying away the plaintiff’s white pine timber. The cause was tried upon the general issue, in the common pleas, and a verdict taken for the plaintiff, subject to the opinion of this court upon the following case. Austin Ladd, being owner of lot number 13, in the first range of seventy aere lots, in Haverhill, executed to the plaintiff a writing in these words— “Haverhill. September 23, 1826. ‘ For value received, I the subscriber, do this day bargain ‘ and sell to Joseph Olmstead, all the pine timber on my lot ‘ No. 13, in the first range of seventy acre lots. I…
1Opinion of the Court
Parker,!.
The first question in this case is, whether any thing passed to the plaintiff, by the contract of Austin Ladd; for if that contract was wholly void, or passed no interest, the plaintiff cannot maintain this action.
It is not disputed that Ladd was, on the 23d of September, 1826, the sole.owner of lot numbered 13 ; and on that day he bargained and sold to the plaintiff all the pine timber upon that lot, and agreed that the plaintiff might have twenty-five years in which to get it off. This contract was reduced to writing, and signed by Ladd, but was not under Seal.
The statute of…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Cook v. StearnsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1814
- Montgomery v. DorionSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1833
- French v. FrenchSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1825
- Putney v. DaySuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1833
3Cited by1 opinion
- Hastings v. CutlerSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1852