Curtis v. Belknap
Supreme Court of Vermont
Assumpsit. The plaintiff alleged, in the third count of his declaration, that, on the seventh of December, 1848, he agreed with Thompson & Kent, by contract in writing, that he would deliver all the stone required for'certain work upon the Vermont Central Rail Road, they furnishing and loading the stone and paying him a price agreed upon for each cubic yard, — the engineer to estimate, from time to time, the amount drawn, and payments to be made accordingly; that afterwards,…
Read the full summary
Assumpsit. The plaintiff alleged, in the third count of his declaration, that, on the seventh of December, 1848, he agreed with Thompson & Kent, by contract in writing, that he would deliver all the stone required for'certain work upon the Vermont Central Rail Road, they furnishing and loading the stone and paying him a price agreed upon for each cubic yard, — the engineer to estimate, from time to time, the amount drawn, and payments to be made accordingly; that afterwards, on the seventeenth of February, 1847, Thompson & Kent having failed to perform their part of the agreement, the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
TJ'ie objection, made in this case, to proving the execution of the Contract between the plaintiff and Thompson & Kent, is one, that has been many times held by this court to be ill founded. That contract was only incidentally in question here. The parties to this contract had never constituted the subscribing witness to that contract the exclusive witness of their contract. Nor could it be well \rgued, that the subscribing witness to any contract could ordinarily know more about the contract than the parties. It seems to involve an absurdity, that the parties should not know all…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Cleveland & Cameron v. HeidenheimerTexas Supreme Court · 1898
- Rundle v. . AllisonNew York Court of Appeals · 1866
- State v. FreemanSupreme Court of Vermont · 1891
- Perry v. JaquithSupreme Court of Vermont · 1913
- Commonwealth v. CastlesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1857