Legal Opinion

George A. Fernald & Co. v. Manley

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided May 13, 1926PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWatson, C. J.

It is enough to say in support of the holding below, that the alleged payment of the note declared upon in plaintiff’s complaint did not include the plaintiff’s costs already accrued in the original action. For this reason the alleged payment was not sufficient in law to defeat or discharge the suit declaring on the note. Nothing short of the payment of the debt and costs could extinguish the claim on which the suit is predicated. The plaintiff would still be entitled to judgment for nominal damages and costs. Stevens v. Briggs, 14 Vt. 44, 39 A. D. 209. It follows that the jurisdiction of the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Goupiel v. Grand Trunk Railway Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1920
  2. Temple Brothers v. MunnettSupreme Court of Vermont · 1924
  3. Stevens v. BriggsSupreme Court of Vermont · 1842

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. State v. LindsaySupreme Court of Vermont · 1938
  2. Valenti v. Imperial Assurance Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1935

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

Powered by the Exa API