Gerrish v. Clark
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Trover, for several articles of household furniture delivered by the plaintiffs to one Barrett, upon a contract in writing which recited that Barrett had hired the goods of the plaintiffs, and was to pay them $10 per month until a price fixed upon each article, amounting in the whole to $29, was paid, when they were to become the absolute property of Barrett; and that, in case of failure to pay the stipulated rent, Barrett should return the same to the plaintiffs on demand.
Read the full summary
Trover, for several articles of household furniture delivered by the plaintiffs to one Barrett, upon a contract in writing which recited that Barrett had hired the goods of the plaintiffs, and was to pay them $10 per month until a price fixed upon each article, amounting in the whole to $29, was paid, when they were to become the absolute property of Barrett; and that, in case of failure to pay the stipulated rent, Barrett should return the same to the plaintiffs on demand. The goods were attached by the defendant, a deputy sheriff, on a writ against Barrett.
1Opinion of the CourtAllen, J.
The contract was a conditional sale of the chattels enumerated, with the prices affixed to each article. The amounts specified to be paid as rent for the use of the furniture were, in the.aggregate, equal to the agreed value or price of all the articles, and were the consideration for the sale and delivery of the chattels, which were to become Barrett’s absolute property when that amount should be paid. It makes no difference that the payments to be made are called rent for the use of the property. Taken together, these payments were agreed upon as the amount of consideration to be paid, and…
2Cited by3 opinions
- United States v. Skinner & Eddy CorporationDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 1928
- Batchelder v. SanbornSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1890
- Michelson v. CollinsSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1904