Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
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
Attorney(S)
Judges

RICE a. v. LYNDEBOROUGH GLASS CO. and Trs.

An agent cannot legally appropriate the property of his principal to the payment of his own debt.

STANLEY, J.

It is not necessary to decide whether the claimant can maintain his right to the funds in the hands of the trustees, for, if he cannot, the trustees are not chargeable in this suit. They do not owe the principal defendant. The suit is against Putnam doing business in the name of the Lyndeborough Glass Co. The funds in the hands of the trustees belong to Tripp Conant, doing business in the name of the Lyndeborough Glass Co. The trustees owe Tripp Conant, not Putnam, and having no funds of Putnam in their hands, they are not chargeable. Greenleaf v. Perrin, 8 N.H. 273; Paul v. Paul, 10 N.H. 120; Boardman v. Cushing, 12 N.H. 112; Getchell v. Chase, 37 N.H. 110; Richards v. R. R., 44 N.H. 127, 139; Forist v. Bellows, 59 N.H. 229; Drake Att., ss. 458, 517, 541, 672. The fact that Putnam agreed to pay this debt from the proceeds of goods sold the trustees, can make no difference. Tripp Conant, to whom the goods belonged, gave Putnam no authority to make such an agreement, and they had no knowledge that he did so. Putnam's unauthorized agreement could not change the title to the goods which he sold the trustees. Holton v. Smith, 7 N.H. 446; Hatch v. Taylor, 10 N.H. 543.

Trustees discharged.

CLARK, J., did not sit: the others concurred.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

RICE v. GLASS CO
(Dec 1, 1880)