Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

ALICE DUBOIS v. EDDIE J. POULIOT d.b.a. EDDIE'S LUNCH.

At common law, actions of tort for personal injuries to the person and the causes of such actions did not survive the death of the alleged wrongdoer. Failure of the plaintiff to procure a scire facias before the end of the second term after the original grant of administration upon the decedent's estate, as required by R.L., c. 355, s. 10, abates and bars a pending action of tort for personal injuries against the decedent. Where an action is abated and barred by the plaintiff's failure to procure a scire facias upon the decedent's estate as required by statute there is no liability on the part of the decedent's insurer in the absence of estoppel except in accordance with the terms of its contract.

JOHNSTON, C.J.

At common law actions of tort for physical injuries to the person and the causes of such actions did not survive the death of the alleged wrongdoer. However, section 10 of chapter 355 of the Revised Laws provides for a right of action that survives the decease of the defendant under certain conditions, but such action can exist only in accordance with the terms of the statute. Halle v. Cavanaugh, 79 N.H. 418. Since the plaintiff did not before the end of the second term after the original grant of administration upon the defendant's estate procure a scire facias to be issued to the executrix of the will of the deceased defendant as the statute provides, the present action abated and is barred.

Barring estoppel, the insuring company cannot be held liable except in accordance with the terms of its contract. Cushman v. County of Grafton, 97 N.H. 32; Boisvert v. Boisvert, 94 N.H. 357. One of the conditions is that: "No action shall lie against the Company . . . until the amount of the Insured's obligation to pay shall have been finally determined either by judgment against the Insured after actual trial or by written agreement of the Insured, the claimant, and the Company." Since there is no estoppel in the present case, the insurer cannot be found liable.

Exceptions overruled.

All concurred.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

DUBOIS v. POULIOT
(Jun 5, 1951)