Hoyt v. Holly
Supreme Court of Connecticut
■ Assumpsit, brought to' the Superior Court in Fairfield county, and tried on the general issue with notice, closed to the court, before Sanford J. Judgment for the plaintiff, and motion for a new trial by the defendant.
Read the full summary
■ Assumpsit, brought to' the Superior Court in Fairfield county, and tried on the general issue with notice, closed to the court, before Sanford J. Judgment for the plaintiff, and motion for a new trial by the defendant. The facts are suf-' ficiently stated in the opinion. , 1. The contract is void as being impossible of performance'. It provides that the plaintiff shall use his influence with his former patrons to get them to employ the defendant, and yet ■permits him to continue his own professional practice in the same village and of course among the same patrons. 1 Swift' Dig., 206, 208,…
1Opinion of the CourtFoster, J.
It appears from the motion in this case that at the time of entering into the contract out of which this suit has arisen, both the parties were practising physicians in the town of Greenwich, the plaintiff at the village of Greenwich, and the defendant at Round Hill.
The plaintiff, being about to leave the village and establish himself in practice in the adjoining town of Stamford, proposed to the defendant to remove from Round Hill to Greenwich village, and take the plaintiff’s place. The plaintiff agreed to recommend the defendant to his patrons and patients in the village and vicinity, and…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Dwight v. HamiltonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1873
- Threlkeld v. StewardSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1909
- Maxwell v. ShermanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1911
- Slack v. SuddothTennessee Supreme Court · 1899
- French v. ParkerSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1888
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.