Backman v. Mussey
Supreme Court of Vermont
Book Account. The auditor reported the following facts: The plaintiff was, when his account accrued, a liquor dealer doing business in the city of New York, and the defendant, during the same time, was a tavern keeper in Middlebury in this State. The plaintiff’s account was for spirituous and intoxicating liquors furnished the defendant, and sold by him at his tavern in violation of the statute of 1852, and the subsequent acts on that subject.
Read the full summary
Book Account. The auditor reported the following facts: The plaintiff was, when his account accrued, a liquor dealer doing business in the city of New York, and the defendant, during the same time, was a tavern keeper in Middlebury in this State. The plaintiff’s account was for spirituous and intoxicating liquors furnished the defendant, and sold by him at his tavern in violation of the statute of 1852, and the subsequent acts on that subject. It appeared that in May, 1856, one Drew, the plaintiff’s agent, called on the defendant in Middlebury, and wished to furnish him with a supply of…
1Opinion of the CourtPoland, J.
All the points made in. this case seem to be decided in the case of Backman v. Wright, 21 Vt. 187.
The contract for the first bill of liquors charged in the plain*551tiff’s account was so far made in this State, though consummated by a delivery without the State, as to be invalid here.
The residue of the liquors charged in the plaintiff’s qccount, were forwarded to the defendant by the plaintiff from New York, in answer to orders sent to him by the defendant, by common carriers, the defendant paying the charges for freight.
This alone would constitute a contract of sale, and a delivery to the…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Starace v. RossiSupreme Court of Vermont · 1897
- Beverwick Brewing Co. v. OliverSupreme Court of Vermont · 1897
- P. Ballantine & Sons v. FennSupreme Court of Vermont · 1914
- In re FennCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1910