Forbes v. Hamilton
Supreme Court of Vermont
GENERAL indebitatus assumpsit. The plaintiff declared, that the defendant, on the 1st of January, 1800, was indebted to him in the sum of 100 dollars for work and labour done at his special instance and request, on his farm in Bridport, &c. Second count. Same sum for money had and received to the plaintiff’s use. General issue joined to the country.
Read the full summary
GENERAL indebitatus assumpsit. The plaintiff declared, that the defendant, on the 1st of January, 1800, was indebted to him in the sum of 100 dollars for work and labour done at his special instance and request, on his farm in Bridport, &c. Second count. Same sum for money had and received to the plaintiff’s use. General issue joined to the country. The plaintiff offered to show in evidence, in support of the first count of his declaration, a parol contract made between the parties, by which the plaintiff was to cut down and clear away the trees standing and growing on a certain six acres of…
1Opinion of the Court
Sed per Curiam.
The object of the act is set forth in the preamble, and is too plain to admit of argument. “ Whereas it is necessary, to prevent uncertainty, fraud and perjury, in transferring real estates, that a mode therefore should be established, easy, certain and notorious, therefore,” &c. And this object is not extended by the expression relied upon, " No action shall be maintained upon any agreement hereafter to be made for the sale of lands, &c. or any interest therein, or concerning them that is, concerning the sale of lands, or any interest therein, which includes the various…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Ives v. RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
- Sumner v. Graham County Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1918
- Walston v. . LowrySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1937