Page v. Thrall
Supreme Court of Vermont
This was an action of assumpsit, commenced on the 30th of March, 1837, upon a receipt for certain articles of personal property, executed on the 21st day of April, 1828, by the defendant to the plaintiff, who was then a constable, and, as such, had attached the property mentioned in the receipt, on a writ in favor of A. S. Brown against Warren Drinwater, The defendant pleaded, among other things, the statute of limitations and a set-off.
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit, commenced on the 30th of March, 1837, upon a receipt for certain articles of personal property, executed on the 21st day of April, 1828, by the defendant to the plaintiff, who was then a constable, and, as such, had attached the property mentioned in the receipt, on a writ in favor of A. S. Brown against Warren Drinwater, The defendant pleaded, among other things, the statute of limitations and a set-off. The receipt in question contained a promise to re-deliver said property on demand, “or indemnify said Page against all damages he may sustain in consequence…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Bennett, J.
There are several questions raised on the argument of this case, but as there is one objection which is fatal to the plaintiff’s recovery, there is no occasion to pass upon the others. The action was commenced on ihe 30th of March, 1837, and the only ground of defence necessary to consider, is the statute of limitations.
■ The plaintiff’s return on the execution is plenary evidence against him that the demand was then made, and the right of action would then accrue on the receipt, unless this is to be varied from the common case of an…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Brown v. GleedSupreme Court of Vermont · 1860
- McDermott v. JaquithSupreme Court of Vermont · 1914
- Carpenter v. Snell' EstateSupreme Court of Vermont · 1864
- Mason v. AldrichSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1886
- Holt v. BurbankSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1866