Legal Opinion

Thompson v. Emery

Superior Court of New Hampshire

Decided December 15, 1853Published

Assumpsit, on a promissory note, dated December 1,1848, by which the defend ants, jointly and severally promised to pay the plaintiff, or order, the sum of $200, on the first day of January, 1851, with interest, annually. There was also a count for money had and received. Plea, the general issue, with a set off. It appeared in evidence that Samuel Simpson was the plaintiff in interest, and his son, Samuel M. Simpson was a witness for the plaintiff.

Read the full summary

Assumpsit, on a promissory note, dated December 1,1848, by which the defend ants, jointly and severally promised to pay the plaintiff, or order, the sum of $200, on the first day of January, 1851, with interest, annually. There was also a count for money had and received. Plea, the general issue, with a set off. It appeared in evidence that Samuel Simpson was the plaintiff in interest, and his son, Samuel M. Simpson was a witness for the plaintiff. Bice, one of the defendants, is dead. Simpson testified that Thompson, the nominal plaintiff, owed his father two notes, amounting to $130, and…

1Opinion of the CourtEastman, J.

The principles that govern the assignment of cboses in action, and the rights that are acquired thereby, are believed to be generally well settled.

The assignee of a chose in action takes it subject to all •the legal defences that could, at the time of the assignment, be set up against it in the hands of the assignor. He acquires by the assignment the rights of the assignor, and nothing more. Of course, we speak not of negotiable paper, indorsed and transferred before due. Sanborn v. Little, 3 N. H. Rep. 539; Green v. Hatch, 12 Mass. Rep. 195.

The assignment of a chose in action may be by…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Jones v. WitterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1816
  2. Crocker v. WhitneyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1813
  3. Doty v. WilsonNew York Supreme Court · 1817
  4. Greene v. HatchMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1815
  5. Briggs v. DorrNew York Supreme Court · 1821

7 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