Legal Opinion

Hoyt v. Cate

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided August 15, 1893PublishedCited by 1 opinion

General assumpsit. Plea, the general issue, payment and offset. Trial by jury at the December term, 1892, Lamoille county, Taft, J., presiding. Verdict and judgment for the plaintiff. The defendant excepts. The plaintiff presented an account of nine items and the the defendant one of five, all of which accrued before December 24, 1890. The testimony showed that on that day the parties had made a jump settlement of their accounts, including these items.

Read the full summary

General assumpsit. Plea, the general issue, payment and offset. Trial by jury at the December term, 1892, Lamoille county, Taft, J., presiding. Verdict and judgment for the plaintiff. The defendant excepts. The plaintiff presented an account of nine items and the the defendant one of five, all of which accrued before December 24, 1890. The testimony showed that on that day the parties had made a jump settlement of their accounts, including these items. The plaintiff admitted that the terms of that settlement had been complied with, but insisted that he was entitled to recover on item two,…

1Opinion of the CourtMunson, J.

The plaintiff claimed to recover upon several items of charge. The defendant presented several items in offset, but claimed that both accounts had been wiped out by a sweeping settlement. The jury found the settlement as claimed by the defendant; but found under an instruction of the court that the plaintiff was entitled to recover one item of his account, notwithstanding the settlement. It is claimed that the charge was erroneous, in view of the testimony of the defendant set forth in the exceptions.

The defendant testified that soon after the settlement was made the plaintiff came to him and…

2Cited by1 opinion

  1. John Morrill & Co. v. New England Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of Vermont · 1899

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API