Low v. Connecticut & Passumpsic Rivers Railroad
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
In Assumpsit. Under the common counts, the plaintiff, in his specification, claimed to recover for his labor and services in organizing said railroad company, in procuring subscriptions to its capital stock, and getting it into operation, from January 1, 1845, to January 15, 1846, §5000;-also, for one horse, delivered to Addison Gilmore, for services by said Gilmore rendered to said company, at their request, §300. Under the general issue, it appeared that by an act of the…
Read the full summary
In Assumpsit. Under the common counts, the plaintiff, in his specification, claimed to recover for his labor and services in organizing said railroad company, in procuring subscriptions to its capital stock, and getting it into operation, from January 1, 1845, to January 15, 1846, §5000;-also, for one horse, delivered to Addison Gilmore, for services by said Gilmore rendered to said company, at their request, §300. Under the general issue, it appeared that by an act of the legislature of Vermont, passed November 10, 1835, it was enacted that Gardner C. Hall and others, twenty-one in all,…
1Opinion of the CourtBellows, J.
The first question is upon the instructions of the court in regard to the services of the plaintiff in procuring a division of the charter. Those instructions were, that, if the Vermont Central Bail-road, while unlawfully using the route of the defendants’ road, were making unreasonable opposition to the bill, and the plaintiff threatened to have them enjoined against such use, that would not prevent him from recovering for his services in procuring the passage of the bill, though the opposition of the Vermont Central Bailroad was withdrawn in consequence of the threat. The request was to…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hall v. Vermont & Massachusetts RailroadSupreme Court of Vermont · 1856
3Cited by1 opinion
- Ashuelot Boot & Shoe Co. v. HoitSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1876