Paddock v. Jones
Supreme Court of Vermont
This was an action of assumpsit on a promissory note, with the common counts joined. The defendant pleaded special matter in bar. To the plaintiff’s replication the defendant demurred. The court, at the September Term, 1867, Pierpoint, Ch. J., presiding, sustained the demurrer, and adjudged the replication to be insufficient, and rendered judgment for the defendant, — to which decision the plaintiff excepted.
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit on a promissory note, with the common counts joined. The defendant pleaded special matter in bar. To the plaintiff’s replication the defendant demurred. The court, at the September Term, 1867, Pierpoint, Ch. J., presiding, sustained the demurrer, and adjudged the replication to be insufficient, and rendered judgment for the defendant, — to which decision the plaintiff excepted. The defendant’s plea was as follows : “ And for further plea in this behalf, by leave of the court for this purpose first had and obtained, said defendant saith, that said plaintiff…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Wilson, J.
This is an action on a promissory note. The questions presented for adjudication arise upon a general demurrer to the plaintiff’s replication to the defendant’s plea in bar. The plea admits the making of the note and the transfer of it to the plaintiff. It sets up as matter of defe'nse, the alleged agreement to extend the time of payment, which amounts to nothing more than matter of excuse for not paying the note according to its terms. This being the nature of the plea, the replication de injuria is allowable and sufficient under a general…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Austin v. ChittendenSupreme Court of Vermont · 1859
3Cited by1 opinion
- Hill v. ShoreySupreme Court of Vermont · 1869