Legal Opinion

Frost v. Frost

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided October 2, 1956No. 4515PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKenison, C. J.

RSA 556:1, 3, provide that no action shall be sustained against an administrator unless a demand was exhibited to him within one year after the original grant of administration and payment has been demanded. One method of complying with these requirements is prescribed by RSA 556:2 which reads as follows: “Notice op claim. A notice sent to the administrator or his agent by registered mail, setting forth the nature and amount of the claim and a demand for payment, shall be deemed a sufficient exhibition and demand.” This method is not exclusive since it has been settled law for a long period…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Reconstruction Finance Corp. v. FaulknerSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1956

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Park County Ex Rel. Park County Welfare Department v. BlackburnWyoming Supreme Court · 1964
  2. Lampton v. LaHoodCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1993
  3. Samuel Rogers v. Joseph RogersSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2019
  4. Lunderville v. MorseSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1972
  5. Blanchard v. CalderwoodSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1969

3 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