Barrels v. Dickinson
Supreme Court of Vermont
Assumpsit on an alleged promise that a horse sold by defendant to plaintiff was capable of doing certain work. Plea, the general issue. Trial by jury at the June Term, 1909, Windsor County, Hall, J., presiding. Verdict and judgment for the plaintiff. The defendant excepted. The opinion states the case.
1Opinion of the CourtPowers, J.
1. The plaintiff bought a horse of the defendant for eighty-five dollars. The trade was made on the evening of January 15, 1908, but the horse was not to be delivered until the next day, and was to be paid for, as the plaintiff represented, by a check which his employer, Earl Martin, was to furnish. Delivery and payment were made accordingly. Subject to the defendant’s exception, the plaintiff was allowed to show that the defendant, after the trade was made and (as shown by the amended exceptions) before the delivery, saw Martin and asked him if he was to furnish such a check, and learned…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- McGovern v. HaysSupreme Court of Vermont · 1902
- Foote v. BrownSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1908
- Douglas v. CarrSupreme Court of Vermont · 1907
- Sergeant v. Martin, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1890
3Cited by3 opinions
- Dyer v. LalorSupreme Court of Vermont · 1920
- Pettingill v. FullerCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1939
- Williams v. NoiseuxSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1861