Putney v. Day
Superior Court of New Hampshire
This was an action of trespass, for breaking and entering the close of the plaintiffs, in Warner, and cutting and carrying away forty pine trees. The cause was tried at February term, of the common pleas, 1833, and a verdict taken for the plaintiffs, subject to the opinion of this court, upon the following case.
Read the full summary
This was an action of trespass, for breaking and entering the close of the plaintiffs, in Warner, and cutting and carrying away forty pine trees. The cause was tried at February term, of the common pleas, 1833, and a verdict taken for the plaintiffs, subject to the opinion of this court, upon the following case. On the 17th of May, 1815, Amos Putney and Henry Lyman, being the owners of the locus in quo, the said Lyman, leased to the said Putney, his half of the lot for the term of fourteen years. On the 21st November, 1825, Amos Putney, by a written contract, in consideration of $ 112,50,…
1Opinion of the CourtRichardson, C. J.
The question is, whether a verbal license, given by Arnos Putney to the defendants, in December, 1828, could avail them as a defence under the circumstances of this case. If it could, the verdict must be set aside and the evidence admitted. If it could not, the verdict is rights and the plaintiffs entitled to judgment.
The contract to sell the trees, in this case, was within the statute of frauds, and it was essential that it should be in writing, 1 Laws, 535; 2 Starkie’s Ev. 598; 6 East, 602; 2 B. & P. 452; 2 Taunton, 38; 7 Johns. 205.
Under certain circumstances, a sale of a growing crop, or…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Cook v. StearnsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1814
- Howard v. EastonNew York Supreme Court · 1810
- Hunt v. EnnisU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Rhode Island · 1821
- Harris v. GillinghamSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1832
3Cited by2 opinions
- Rankin v. RidgeNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1948
- Olmstead v. NilesSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1835