Appeal, from the commissioner of insolvency on the estate represented by the defendant. The plaintiff and his wife lived with, took care of, and supported the deceased until his death, under a verbal agreement with him that he would devise or convey to the wife his homestead and personal estate, and to the plaintiff his wood-lot. He devised the homestead and personal estate to the wife, but did not devise or convey his wood-lot to the plaintiff.
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1879-03-05
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently April 1941
1 federal appellate · 6 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
¶1
The items of the specification made an investigation of accounts necessary. The action was properly sent to an auditor, and
*517
the auditor’s report was evidence for a jury.
Doyle
v.
Doyle,
56 N. H. 567.
¶2
No action at law could be maintained on the special contract to convey land, which was notin writing and was within the statute of frauds; but the plaintiff was entitled to recover for the money expended, and what the labor and services performed under the contract were reasonably worth.
Ham
v.
Goodrich, 87
N. H. 185.
