Whitcomb v. Gilman
Supreme Court of Vermont
Book Account. The auditor reported that the first item of the plaintiff’s account was for labor from December 26th, 1859, to July 11th, 1860, at the rate of fifteen dollars per month; that shortly before the 26th of December, 1859, the plaintiff contracted with the defendant to work for the latter, at general farm work, for one year from that date, at fifteen dollars per month, with a stipulation that either party should have the right to terminate such contract at any time…
Read the full summary
Book Account. The auditor reported that the first item of the plaintiff’s account was for labor from December 26th, 1859, to July 11th, 1860, at the rate of fifteen dollars per month; that shortly before the 26th of December, 1859, the plaintiff contracted with the defendant to work for the latter, at general farm work, for one year from that date, at fifteen dollars per month, with a stipulation that either party should have the right to terminate such contract at any time during the year When he should become dissatisfied and desire to terminate it; that the plaintiff worked for the…
1Opinion of the CourtAldis, J.
I. The auditor finds that the plaintiff' worked two Sundays in the sugar-place, at the request of the defendant, “ when it was necessary in order to save a great waste of sap.” The necessity of the work is established, unless in the eye of the law it never can be necessary to work on Sunday to prevent a great waste of sap.
In the business of making maple sugar, it is extremely difficult to tell when there will be an abundant flow of sap, and to provide fully for it. Perhaps there is nothing in ordinary farm work more uncertain. When the weather is just right and the advance of spring, the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Hubbard v. BeldenSupreme Court of Vermont · 1855
- Patrick v. PutnamSupreme Court of Vermont · 1855
- Seaver v. MorseSupreme Court of Vermont · 1848
3Cited by6 opinions
- State v. CorologosSupreme Court of Vermont · 1928
- City of Topeka v. HempsteadSupreme Court of Kansas · 1897
- Donovan v. McCartyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1892
- Rawlins v. Honolulu Soap Works Co.Hawaii Supreme Court · 1893
- Doll v. NobleNew York Supreme Court · 1886
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.