Noyes, French & Fickett v. Parker
Supreme Court of Vermont
Assumpsit. Plea, tlie general issue. Trial by jury at the September term, 1891, Tyler, J., presiding. Yerdict and judgment for the plaintiffs. The defendant excepts. The case appears in the opinion. The court should have instructed the jury that evidence of contradictory statements made out of court should be weighed with caution. 1 Green], Ev. s. 200, p. 237;- Malin v- Malin, 1 Wend. 652 ; Cleveland v. Burton, 11 Yt. 138.
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
THOMPSON, J.
The defendant contends that the burden of proof was on the plaintiffs to prove that the defendant did not deliver the thirty tubs of butter either on the cars or at the railroad station, whichever the jury found the place of delivery to be, and that the court below neglected to so charge the jury. Without deciding on which party this burden rested, we think the court instructed the jury that this burden was on the plaintiffs. Some time prior to June 13, 1889, the parties made a •contract by which the defendant was to sell and deliver to the…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- State v. RoeSupreme Court of Vermont · 1840
- Driggs v. BurtonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1871
- Rowell v. Fuller's EstateSupreme Court of Vermont · 1887
- Latremouille v. Bennington & Rutland Ry. Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1891
- Yale v. SeelySupreme Court of Vermont · 1843
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- State v. HodgsonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1893
- Mullaney v. C. H. Goss Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1923
- Trow v. ThomasSupreme Court of Vermont · 1898
- Porter v. FlemingSupreme Court of Vermont · 1931
- Tennessee Central Railroad v. BrownTennessee Supreme Court · 1911
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.