Langdon v. Burrill
Supreme Court of Vermont
Indebitatus Assumpsit. Plea, the general issue, and trial by jury, November Term, 1846, — Redfield, J., presiding. On trial it appeared, that the .plaintiff, at the request of the defendant, had made advances and incurred liabilities for the defendant in the purchase of a quantity of butter and cheese; that the defendant drew a draft upon his brother, at Worcester, Massachusetts, to reimburse the plaintiff, and also executed to the plaintiff a bill of sale of the butter and…
Read the full summary
Indebitatus Assumpsit. Plea, the general issue, and trial by jury, November Term, 1846, — Redfield, J., presiding. On trial it appeared, that the .plaintiff, at the request of the defendant, had made advances and incurred liabilities for the defendant in the purchase of a quantity of butter and cheese; that the defendant drew a draft upon his brother, at Worcester, Massachusetts, to reimburse the plaintiff, and also executed to the plaintiff a bill of sale of the butter and cheese, under an agreement, that, if the draft were not duly paid, the plaintiff might consign the butter and cheese to…
1Opinion of the Court
*468The opinion of the court was delivered by
Kellogg, J.
The only question raised in this case arises upon the instructions given by the court, in answer to an inquiry made by the jury, after the case had been committed to them and they had retired for consultation, but before they delivered their verdict into court.
The plaintiff having made certain advances to and incurred liabilities for the defendant, the defendant, to secure a reimbursement of the same, executed to the plaintiff a bill of sale of a quantity of butter and cheese, under an express agreement with the plaintiff, that, if a certain…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Smith v. . WetmoreNew York Court of Appeals · 1901
- McManus v. Western Assurance Co.New York Supreme Court · 1898
- McManus v. Western Assurance Co. of TorontoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1899
- Huffstater v. HayesNew York Supreme Court · 1873