• Assumpsit, for money had and received. The plaintiff’s wife, in her last sickness, having in her possession $150 in money belonging to the plaintiff, in his presence and with his consent delivered the same to C. in trust as a gift of $50 to each of their three minor children. All the parties understood that the gift was complete.
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1882-06-05
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently April 1951
8 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 money was as much the gift of the plaintiff as if he had delivered it to O. with his own hand. No element necessary to make it a completely executed gift was wanting. It was beneficial to the children, and their acceptance is presumed.
Hurd
v. Silsby, 10 N. H. 110;
Peavey
v. Tilton, 18 N. H. 151;
Fellows
v. Greenleaf, 43 N. H. 421;
Johnson
v. Farley, 45 N. H. 505. The plaintiff’s suggestion that the money be deposited in a particular way was advisory, and not a condition or limitation of the gift.
