Taft v. Town of Pittsford
Supreme Court of Vermont
Assumpsit. The declaration contained a special count upon the town order, hereafter described, and the general counts for money, work and labor, materials, &c. Plea, the general issue; trial by jury, March Term, 1855, — Pieepoint, J., presiding.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit. The declaration contained a special count upon the town order, hereafter described, and the general counts for money, work and labor, materials, &c. Plea, the general issue; trial by jury, March Term, 1855, — Pieepoint, J., presiding. The plaintiff read in evidence the order counted upon, which was signed by a majority of the selectmen of the town of Pitts-ford, and had been presented to the treasurer for payment, and was in the words following: “ The town treasurer is directed to pay Henry C. Taft one hun- “ dred dollars, it being in part payment in building road from depot £Cto…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Redfield, Ch. J.
It was decided by this court, during the last year, in the county of Franklin, that county orders are not negotia*289ble, when made payable to order, chiefly upon the ground that the question of the authority of the judges, in drawing the order, should be kept open to examination, into whosever hands the orders might come. The same reason would apply, with even greater force, to town orders drawn by the selectmen. But see Dalrymple v. Whitingham, 26 Vt. 345.
If the selectmen had no power to make the contract for building the road, at the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Dalrymple v. Town of WhitinghamSupreme Court of Vermont · 1854
3Cited by9 opinions
- Town of New Haven v. WestonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1913
- Rens v. City of Grand RapidsMichigan Supreme Court · 1889
- Clarke v. JanesvilleDistrict Court, D. Wisconsin · 1856
- Spafford v. Town of NorwichSupreme Court of Vermont · 1899
- Town of Shrewsbury v. DavisSupreme Court of Vermont · 1928
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.