From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Stearns v. Wallace

Supreme Court of New Hampshire Hillsborough
Jun 1, 1879
59 N.H. 595 (N.H. 1879)

Opinion

June, 1879.

W. W. Bailey, for the plaintiff.

Wadleigh Wallace, for the defendant.

No briefs furnished.


There is nothing in the case to take it out of the general rules that an infant is responsible for his torts. Fitts v. Hall, 9 N.H. 441; School District v. Bragdon, 23 N.H. 507, 516; Beckley v. Newcomb, 24 N.H. 359; Woodman v. Hubbard, 25 N.H. 67, 73; Prescott v. Norris, 32 N.H. 101; Eaton v. Hill, 50 N.H. 235; Cooley Torts 103.

Exception overruled.

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


Summaries of

Stearns v. Wallace

Supreme Court of New Hampshire Hillsborough
Jun 1, 1879
59 N.H. 595 (N.H. 1879)
Case details for

Stearns v. Wallace

Case Details

Full title:STEARNS v. WALLACE

Court:Supreme Court of New Hampshire Hillsborough

Date published: Jun 1, 1879

Citations

59 N.H. 595 (N.H. 1879)

Citing Cases

Smith v. Bailey

There is no question that an infant may be held liable for his torts. Stearns v. Wallace, 59 N.H. 595, and…

Porter v. Wilson

A stranger must think it strange that a minor in certain cases may be liable for his torts and responsible…