Bell v. Kendrick
Superior Court of New Hampshire
In this case the plaintiff put to the trustee the following-interrogatory : Have you at any time received any deed or deeds of any lands of your son, James Kendrick, and if so, when, of lands, and on what consideration ? y Answer.
Read the full summary
In this case the plaintiff put to the trustee the following-interrogatory : Have you at any time received any deed or deeds of any lands of your son, James Kendrick, and if so, when, of lands, and on what consideration ? y Answer. About seven years ago I received a deed of James Kendrick, of a lot of land in Lebanon, near the falls in Connecticut river, for which I paid a full consideration, and in which there is no trust for the benefit of said Kendrick ; nor am I bound to answer for the rents and profits of any part thereof to said James. The plaintiff then put the following…
1Opinion of the CourtRichardson, C. J.
It is insisted, in this case, that the trustee is not bound to answer certain interrogatories which have been put to him, because his answers may tend to impair or impeach his title to the land; and several cases have been cited, in which it has been held, that he is not bound to answer, where such would be the effect of his answers. It was so held in Boardman vs. Roe, 13 Mass. R. 104, where it was said that no man shall be held to disparage his title ; and in Russell vs. Jervis, 15 Mass. R. 127, where it was said that *522the trtistee was not obliged to answer any question which tend to impair…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Boardman v. RoeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1816
- Russell v. LewisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1818
- Pierson v. WellerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1799