Peck v. Thompson
Supreme Court of Vermont
Assumpsit in several counts, but the one on which the plaintiff relied, was as follows : — “Also, in a further plea of the case for that whereas, heretofore, to wit, on the 16th day of November, 1836, there was pending in the county court, then sitting at Montpelier, within and for the county of Washington, an action of assumpsit on an accountable receipt, in favor of John Campbell, jr., against Moses Peck, the present plaintiff, which said receipt, and the matters in…
Read the full summary
Assumpsit in several counts, but the one on which the plaintiff relied, was as follows : — “Also, in a further plea of the case for that whereas, heretofore, to wit, on the 16th day of November, 1836, there was pending in the county court, then sitting at Montpelier, within and for the county of Washington, an action of assumpsit on an accountable receipt, in favor of John Campbell, jr., against Moses Peck, the present plaintiff, which said receipt, and the matters in controversy in said suit, the defendants in this suit were equitably bound to settle, pay, and take up. And the said…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Royce, J.
The motion in arrest has not been urged in the argument, and will, therefore, be passed without remark.
There are two particulars in which the evidence on trial varied from the averments in the declaration: — One in reference to the alleged equitable obligation of both these defendants to settle and pay the claim of Campbell; and the other in relation to the alleged fact that Campbell’s suit against the plaintiff was pending when the defendants made the promise declared on. It might be sufficient to remark, that the former allegation can only…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Brintnall v. Saratoga & Whitehall RailroadSupreme Court of Vermont · 1860