Cocheco Aqueduct Ass'n v. Boston & Maine R. R.
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit, on the common counts for labor performed and materials furnished in constructing an aqueduct. The plaintiffs’ evidence tended to show an oral contract, whereby the defendants agreed to receive from the plaintiffs, for ten years, at a price named, a quantity of water daily, at a round-house to be built by the defendants.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit, on the common counts for labor performed and materials furnished in constructing an aqueduct. The plaintiffs’ evidence tended to show an oral contract, whereby the defendants agreed to receive from the plaintiffs, for ten years, at a price named, a quantity of water daily, at a round-house to be built by the defendants. After the contract was made, Bickford, an agent of the defendants, requested the plaintiffs to proceed to construct their aqueduct at once, and complete it by the first of the next January, saying, although the round-house was not built the water would be useful in…
1Opinion of the CourtBingham, J.
The plaintiffs cannot maintain an action upon the defendants’ executory agreement to take the water and pay for it, because it was not to be performed within one year, and was not in writing; nor upon an implied promise to pay for water, because none has been furnished. But they seek to recover for the cost of their aqueduct, which they were constructing for the purpose of supplying the water they had agreed to furnish. In view of the evidence, and the refusal to order a nonsuit, the charge to the jury must have meant, that if the aqueduct was constructed to supply the water which the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Kiley v. DervinMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1943
3Cited by2 opinions
- Cox v. PinkhamSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1921
- Harris v. RounsevelSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1881