Case ID: nh_71/html/0618-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Chase, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Rockingham,
    May 24, 1901.
    Seabrook v. Brown & a.
    
    Debt, on bonds given by Brown as principal and the other defendants as sureties, for the faithful performance by Brown of his duties as collector of taxes for Seabrook in the years 1896 and 1897. The facts were found by a referee, and the case transferred from the October term, 1900, of the supreme court by Wallace, J.
    The bonds were not filed in either year, within six days after Brown’s appointment, as required by the statute. He acted as collector. The report was in favor of the plaintiffs, and judgment was ordered upon it, subject to the defendants’ exception.
    
      Page & Bartlett, for the plaintiffs.
    
      John W. Kelley and Samuel W. Emery, for the defendants.
   Chase, J.

It is immaterial whether Brown was collector of taxes de jure, or only de facto. The defendants, having bound themselves for the faithful performance of his duties as collector, are estopped from denying -that he was such officer. Horn v. Whittier, 6 N. H. 88; Hall v. Brackett, 62 N. H. 509.

Exception overruled.

All concurred.