History
  • No items yet
midpage
Merrill v. Carr
60 N.H. 114
N.H.
1880
Check Treatment

When the plaintiff was discovered carrying away the defendant's property, a search of his house for other stolen property was contemplated. A part of the consideration of the note was the defendant's agreement not to search the plaintiff's *Page 115 house that night. Issuing a warrant to search a house for stolen property is a proceeding to recover the property and bring the thief to punishment. G. L., c. 255, ss. 2, 3, 4; Morrison Just. Sher. 260. A contract to suppress a criminal prosecution, even for a limited time, is illegal. The consideration of the note in question was partly the defendant's agreement not to commence criminal proceedings against the plaintiff before the next day. A note is void if part of the consideration is illegal. Hinds v. Chamberlin, 6 N.H. 225, 229, 231; Forshner v. Whitcomb, 44 N.H. 14.

Set-off disallowed.

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

Case Details

Case Name: Merrill v. Carr
Court Name: Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Date Published: Jun 5, 1880
Citation: 60 N.H. 114
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.