Legal Opinion

Wilder v. Budd Et Ux.

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided February 7, 1939PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtMoulton, C. J.

The plaintiff is the indorsee of a promissory-note, signed by the defendants, who are husband and wife. Judgment was rendered below against both. The wife only has excepted.

Her claim, as made in her exceptions to the refusal of the trial court to comply with certain of her requests for findings, and to the judgment against her, is that the evidence shows conclusively that she signed the note as surety for .her husband, and therefore she cannot be held liable.

This is the same issue that was passed upon in our recent decision in McNamara v. Pickett et ux., 109 Vt. 500, 1 Atl. (2d), 716, wherein…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. McNamara v. Pickett Et Ux.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1938
  2. Bucklin v. NarkwichSupreme Court of Vermont · 1936
  3. Valiquette v. SmithSupreme Court of Vermont · 1936

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Horicon v. Estate of LangloisSupreme Court of Vermont · 1949

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

Powered by the Exa API