From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Johnson v. Prescott

Supreme Court of New Hampshire Merrimack
Jun 1, 1893
43 A. 1075 (N.H. 1893)

Summary

In Prescott v. Johnson, 91 Minn. 273, 97 N.W. 891, the court held that: "Undue influence," which will invalidate a gift, "must be something which destroys the free agency of the donor, and substitutes therefor the will of another.

Summary of this case from Peacock v. DuBois

Opinion

Decided June, 1893.

John W. Center and Charles R. Morrison, for the plaintiff.

Streeter, Walker Chase, for the defendant.


TRESPASS, q. cl. Verdict for the defendant. The boundary line between the parties and the location of a corner were in dispute. A witness called by the defendant was permitted to testify, subject to exception, that on a survey of the line made by him the plaintiff's brother was present and did not object to his taking the corner to be at the place where the defendant claimed it to be, and for this cause the verdict was set aside.

BLODGETT, J., did not sit.


Summaries of

Johnson v. Prescott

Supreme Court of New Hampshire Merrimack
Jun 1, 1893
43 A. 1075 (N.H. 1893)

In Prescott v. Johnson, 91 Minn. 273, 97 N.W. 891, the court held that: "Undue influence," which will invalidate a gift, "must be something which destroys the free agency of the donor, and substitutes therefor the will of another.

Summary of this case from Peacock v. DuBois
Case details for

Johnson v. Prescott

Case Details

Full title:JOHNSON v. PRESCOTT

Court:Supreme Court of New Hampshire Merrimack

Date published: Jun 1, 1893

Citations

43 A. 1075 (N.H. 1893)
67 N.H. 597

Citing Cases

Leuba v. Bailey

Authorities involving the issue of undue influence do not fall into fact patterns which provide an easy…

Smith v. Smith

r, 258 Mo. 921, 167 S.W. 444; Chambers v. Chambers, 227 Mo. 284. (2) The assumption that Tom Smith bore a…