Town of Hanover v. Eaton
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Tins was- an action of assumpsit, upon a written agreement, as follows : “ The subscribers, in behalf of the town of JVeare. here- “ by acknowledge notice to have been given us by the se- “ lectmen of the town of Hanover, in relation to the support of the family of John Kimball, for which said selectmen of a Hanover claim payment of us, and engage to take no ad-i£ vantage, and will not hold them to furnish evidence of said “ notice having been done in the form prescribed…
Read the full summary
Tins was- an action of assumpsit, upon a written agreement, as follows : “ The subscribers, in behalf of the town of JVeare. here- “ by acknowledge notice to have been given us by the se- “ lectmen of the town of Hanover, in relation to the support of the family of John Kimball, for which said selectmen of a Hanover claim payment of us, and engage to take no ad-i£ vantage, and will not hold them to furnish evidence of said “ notice having been done in the form prescribed bylaw. 44 This acknowledgment extends to all claims for said sup-u port, from the 8th ■March last past. SAMUEL EATON, )…
1Opinion of the CourtRichardson, C. J.
Incases of this kind, the question is, did the agent intend, and had he authority, to bind his principal ? And this intent is to be collected, not only from the written contract, but from the circumstances of the parties at the time. Hodgdon vs. Dexter.—1 Cranch 345, Unwin vs. Woolsey.—1 D. & E. 674, Mac Beath vs. Haldimand.—1 D. & E. 172.—4 Mass. Rep. 595, Tippetts vs. Walker.—5 do. 164.-9 do. 335.
There is in this respect no difference between an agent of government, and an agent of an individual. 15 John. 1, Rathbone vs. Budlong.
The first question is, had the defendants authority to bind…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- S. & J. Rathbon v. BudlongNew York Supreme Court · 1818
3Cited by4 opinions
- Andover v. GraftonSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1834
- Peterborough v. LancasterSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1843
- Carlton v. BathSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1851
- Inhabitants of Unity v. Inhabitants of ThorndikeSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1838