History
  • No items yet
midpage
Bancroft v. Holton
59 N.H. 141
N.H.
1879
Check Treatment

The payment having been made and received on a general account of many items of existing legal indebtedness, without any express application of it by either party to any particular items, the law infers the parties intended a just application at the time of payment. There is no ground for a presumption that they then intended the application should be made at a future time, at the date of the writ in this action. The question is, What was their intention when the payment was made? At that time they did not anticipate this suit. The legal presumption is, that they applied the payment to the oldest items due at the time of the payment, there being no equity or other evidence tending to show an intention to make a different application. Parks v. Ingram, 22 N.H. 283, 295; Thompson v. Phelan,22 N.H. 339, 350.

Case discharged.

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

Case Details

Case Name: Bancroft v. Holton
Court Name: Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Date Published: Jun 5, 1879
Citation: 59 N.H. 141
Court Abbreviation: N.H.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.