Merrill v. Woodbury
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit, on a promissory note given by the defendant to the plaintiff’s husband now deceased. The plaintiff sues as administratrix without appointment, under Gen. Laws, c. 198, s. 10, and has secured the claim by attachment of the defendant’s property. Since the commencement of the suit, Weeks has been appointed administrator of Merrill’s estate, and declines to indorse the writ and prosecute the suit.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit, on a promissory note given by the defendant to the plaintiff’s husband now deceased. The plaintiff sues as administratrix without appointment, under Gen. Laws, c. 198, s. 10, and has secured the claim by attachment of the defendant’s property. Since the commencement of the suit, Weeks has been appointed administrator of Merrill’s estate, and declines to indorse the writ and prosecute the suit. The motion of the defendant to dismiss the action for want of prosecution by the administrator was denied, and the defendant excepted.
1Opinion of the Court
The plaintiff had the right by statute to bring the suit in her own name as administratrix, though never having been appointed. G. L., c. 198, s. 10. The administrator subsequently appointed, refusing to come in and indorse the writ and prosecute the suit, though two terms of court have elapsed since the action was brought, it does not appear on what ground the motion to dismiss was denied. The statute provides that actions brought, as this was, shall not be abated if the administrator appointed shall appear and indorse the writ and prosecute the suit as plaintiff at the first or second term;…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Tappan v. TappanSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1855
3Cited by4 opinions
- Halle v. CavanaughSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1920
- Cummings v. FarnhamSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1908
- Porter v. Dartmouth CollegeDistrict Court, D. New Hampshire · 2010
- Porter v. Dartmouth College, et al.District Court, D. New Hampshire · 2010