Waller v. Keyes
Supreme Court of Vermont
This was an action on a note against Elias Keyes & Co. Service was made on Elias Keyes only. Plea, non-assumpsit. The plaintiff, after proving the signature of the note herein-after mentioned to be in the hand writing of Ephraim W. Bisbee, offered in evidence, in support of his declaration, a note in writing, in the words and figures following, to wit: “On fhe 8th day of December, 1830, we promise to pay Frederick Cushman, Jr. or bearer two hundred thirty-three and 30-100…
Read the full summary
This was an action on a note against Elias Keyes & Co. Service was made on Elias Keyes only. Plea, non-assumpsit. The plaintiff, after proving the signature of the note herein-after mentioned to be in the hand writing of Ephraim W. Bisbee, offered in evidence, in support of his declaration, a note in writing, in the words and figures following, to wit: “On fhe 8th day of December, 1830, we promise to pay Frederick Cushman, Jr. or bearer two hundred thirty-three and 30-100 dollars, with interest. This note is given in part payment for a village lot in Norfolk, this day deeded to us by said…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Williams, Ch. J.
— The testimony on which the verdict in this case was taken is introduced into the bill of exceptions. The jury have passed upon the facts. The law on the subject is very simple, and we see no reason to disturb their verdict. The first question which has been presented is a question in relation to the variance between the declaration and the note given in evidence. This, however, has been abandoned in the argument. It appears that the court having decided that the articles of partnership originally entered into by the defendant and…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Deardorf's Administrator v. ThacherSupreme Court of Missouri · 1883
- Tancre v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1886
- Adams v. LongAppellate Court of Illinois · 1904