Randall v. Beryl Lumber Co.
Supreme Court of Vermont
Action oe Contract. Plea, the general issue and offset. Trial by jury at the March Term, 1920, Chittenden' County, Fish. J., presiding. Verdict and judgment for the plaintiff. The defendant excepted. The opinion states the case.
1Opinion of the CourtPowers, J.
[1] By a familiar rule, long established and frequently approved in this State, the checks bearing the memoranda “salary to date” and “salary in full to date”, drawn to and used by the plaintiff, operated as an accord and satisfac*159tion of any controversy concerning the matters referred to in the memoranda. Connecticut River Lumber Co. v. Brown, 68 Vt. 239, 35 Atl. 56; Murphy v. Little, 69 Vt. 261, 37 Atl. 968; In re Stevens & Adams, 74 Vt. 408, 52 Atl. 1034; Bianchi Granite Co. v. Terre Haute Monument Co., 91 Vt. 177, 99 Atl. 875. But they did not so operate beyond their terms. They cut off…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Royce v. CarpenterSupreme Court of Vermont · 1907
- Connecticut River Lumber Co. v. BrownSupreme Court of Vermont · 1895
- Pond v. Pond's EstateSupreme Court of Vermont · 1906
- G. R. Bianchi Granite Co. v. Terre Haute Monument Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1917
- Murphy v. LittleSupreme Court of Vermont · 1897
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- State v. WintersSupreme Court of Vermont · 1929
- State v. TubbsSupreme Court of Vermont · 1928
- Dow v. A. C. Cheney Piano Action Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1932
- Niles v. FullerSupreme Court of Vermont · 1929
- Morris v. WallaceSupreme Court of Vermont · 1937