History
  • No items yet
midpage
Carroll v. Giddings
58 N.H. 333
| N.H. | 1878
|
Check Treatment

The defendant claims that the plaintiff cannot recover; that his action should have been special assumpsit for the damage done him by the defendant in refusing to allow the plaintiff to perfect his contract.

If a special contract is open, not executed, and a party seeks to recover damages for a breach of it, he must declare specially, stating the contract and the breach, and general assumpsit will not lie. But when a contract is at an end, either by its provisions or by the wrongful act of the defendant, so that nothing remains to be done but to pay money, general assumpsit will lie. Moulton v. Trask, 9 Met. 577; 2 Greenl. Ev., s. 104; Canada v. Canada, 6 Cush. 15.

The act of the defendant gave the plaintiff the right to treat the contract as ended, and he can maintain his action of assumpsit on a quantum meruit. Chitty on Con 11th ed.) 1091, note n; Derby v. Johnson, 21 Vt. 17; Planche v. Colburn, 8 Bing. 14; Goodman v. Pocock, 16 A. E. (N.S.) 576.

Judgment of the verdict.

FOSTER and CLARK, JJ., did not sit.

Case Details

Case Name: Carroll v. Giddings
Court Name: Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Date Published: Jun 5, 1878
Citation: 58 N.H. 333
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.